User talk:Coldupnorth/Archive1

again welcome to wikipedia. and thanks for your work on isolines. another editor has suggested merging isolines into contour line. what are your thoughts? regards Anlace 14:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

no problem. I'm sitting on Special:Newpages right now, and it beats adding {{db}} tags. Algebraist 15:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind remarks on my talk page. :) --Hnsampat 15:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks too for the Barnstar you awarded me. My son says he remembers you from CHS and that you were always mad :-) --Terry C 09:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:SirCharlesMadden.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear LordHarris, could you please save the DfES image in Commons in order to allow other projects to use it? I created an article about DfES in pt-wiki and would be great put the image there. Kind regards, MHV 11:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll try to upload it to Commons myself. Many thanks, MHV 18:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, you introduced an error into James Callaghan's biography. He attended Northern Secondary School which definitely became Northern Grammar Schools and Mayfield School. The school and Old Boys Association have copies of his replies to various loyal addresses sent to him on his accession as Prime Minister and on major birthdays. The City of Portsmouth Boys School was formed from the old Technical High School and Hilsea Modern Boys School. Being an old boy of the school, I can understand your wish to claim him, but sorry, not true! The Technical High School did not even exist when he was at school, indeed virtually the whole area was still green fields. (I am intrigued by the suggestion that it dates back to 1905 in some way, will be interested to hear any evidence of this!) Conversely, if you're back in Portsmouth you may like to trek down Mayfield Road and see the words "Northern [Secondary] School" still carved in stone above Mayfield's entrance! I was interested to see your note under Mayfield School concerning the plaque in CPBS, I will contact them and ask them to justify it as I fear it is erroneous (please see additional notes on that page). Hyperman 42 00:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Update: Thanks for getting back to me. Apologies about the original comment (which I have deleted), however I did need to spend some considerable time navigating round correcting all the relevant pages back again and at the time I did not see why you had made the change. However on principle one should be careful about changing statements of fact on Wikipedia pages unless absolutely sure of one's source; this information is now widely used and we need to be sure that it is accurate! I expect the plaque will be to the effect that JC opened the hall or something similar. There has been absolutely no doubt in books, city records etc for the last 50 years that NSS became NGS, and I remember the TV cameras visiting Mayfield when JC became Prime Minister, but I do note that this information does not seem to have made its way on to the Internet elsewhere so it would have been difficult for you to crosscheck. Well done on the rest of the article though. Regards, Hyperman 42 18:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar, very kind of you! Hyperman 42 00:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Rosetta Stone was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 16:28, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I see you've edited the CHS page previously. I have just made significant changes to it, what do you think of them? Do you have any extra info to add, eg what productions they've done and when, history of school, suitable pictures? Churchillarian 19:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The December 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Cbrown1023 00:42, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Universe was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 21:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:SirJohnHDCunningham.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

"rank of Fleet Admiral in the service of the Royal Navy" &etc be a touch careful with usage as you gave him a rank existing in the US not the RN. Likewise AotF is not shortened to A Alci12 15:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

That's great, it's much easier to fix these things before you have created loads of articles as hard experience shows :) We certainly need more naval article so it's good to see someone having a go. Alci12 13:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Wall Street Crash of 1929 was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 01:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I am unsure. In my view, the best way to approach Spielberg's very lengthy life story would simply summarise it as told in Joseph McBride's book, then reference it more with all the other books written in it's wake. To really clean-up the article would be to simply write a chronology, in order to fully summarise and contextualise it. There's a part of me that'd may also wait for Spielberg to die, to help do that too.

I'm currently focusing on Jurassic Park and E.T. to a lesser extent. Would you care to drop by the former's peer review? Wiki-newbie 16:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've put my attentions back on JP. Use the cite book template to write the book's name in the References section, then cite pages in-line in the text, kinda like how I'm doing. Just reference everything you can with your books, and I'll clean it up if you have any difficulty. Wiki-newbie 15:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Again. New article looks good. I don't think I'll ever be much more than a dabbler in Wikipedia - all these commands! It seems almost easier to me to put the pages together in Dreamweaver and publish them yourself. I noticed that you used a "ref". Was thios supposed to go somewhere? It's ended up as just a figure 1 in brackets.

What period were you covering the 1SLs from / to? I've looked in the ODNB myself on occasions and found it useful but it doesn't seem to cover everyone. I am just starting out on a project that has come out of the Hood work. This will hopefully eventually cover most Admirals of the first half of the C20th. If you want to vary your sources a little there's a book called 'First sea lords' subtitled 'from Fisher to Mountbatten' which was written by various naval authors and edited by a chap called Murfitt. It's on ABE but is never cheap. If you want to have a look at it your local library should be able to get it as an out of county loan if they don't have it locally.

Keep in touch,

Paul Bevand 15:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Paul Bevand

Sorry, struggling with that 'ref' thing now. Lost the original reply from the other day.

Found photo of Field and one of his grave at Escrick if they are any good to you.

Paul

Thanks for the Barnstar! I never realised you got awards for working on pages! I'm also glad you enjoyed the read too!Gavin Scott 03:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, thank you, I wouldn't get the idea if you didn't started. Your changes were not in all ways ideal but it was very good start and you also reorganized the article very well. Regards.--Pethr 16:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:TIME Magazine May. 19, 1997.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 22:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi LordHarris. I see you are one of the major contributors to the Bloomsbury article. We currently share an interest! I'm working on the article at the moment to make improvements - as you may have noticed. Changes to an article that someone is familiar with can sometimes seem dramatic - even when those changes may be for the better. The layout of the article is rather information heavy at the top, unrelieved by attractive visual images. There is a very heavy, long and intrusive template at the start of the article. This template intrudes into several sections of the article, displacing the arrangement. This is frowned upon by most Wiki editors. I have worked on extending the introduction, both in terms of giving more information about the topic, but also to create a better visual feel and sense of balance. This makes it more inviting for the average reader. To help me extend the intro and to give an attractive visual impact I moved an impressive image into the space below the introduction. This also balanced the template and prevented it from extending into the following sections. You have just changed my edit back into its previous state. I don't wish to get into a revert war - and you may be right. It is after all just a difference of opinion between two editors. However, I would be interested to hear your reasons for preferring the template to displace the following sections, and for not having an attractive and powerful image early in the article. Regards SilkTork 23:06, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for messaging. I agree with you about the top heavy and the template box. I reverted your image from the centre because it left a huge gap inbetween the intro and the contents box on my screen. I think its important that an article have some quality images throughout the article but it just seemed messy with it centered at that particular point with the article. Perhaps it would be possible to move the image to the left or right side of the article. If you look across wikipedia its not very often, infact quite rare to find images, except very long ones centered. Furthermore it is "guidelines" not to have anything before the content except the introduction and either an image or a template box. In this case the image is the map of bloomsbury in the ridiculously large template. Im all for the image of the British Museum inset on the article, but think it would be better after the contents? I have just added the image back, but after the contents, how does it look on your screen? If you think it looks bad where it is then feel free to revert. I think generally the article will be easier to tidy up/improve the style as more textual content is added in the future. LordHarris 23:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I know what you mean about the space. I did force the image larger - this does, however, mean that not all browsers get the forced size; some will get a smaller size with the resultant space that you mention. I hadn't considered that. I will get in touch with the London Project who are responsible for the template. It will have the same negative impact on all London district articles. Much of the information is non-essential. Geographic articles that have been featured articles very rarely have had templates that large as a lead template. In fact I can only think of two - Dorset and Weymouth (curiously both British - I suppose the same guy is responsible for the template!). I will play around with the lead a bit more. An image may appear there now and again (or may not). Don't worry. I don't stay with articles. After I'm through you can revert back if you don't like what I have done. I don't keep a watch on stuff. Regards. SilkTork 23:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I see what you've done. However, the template is still intruding and displacing. I'm going to extend the intro - but there is a limit to how long an intro can be. SilkTork 23:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)