This is an archive of past discussions with Nthep. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello, Nthep, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Victuallers (talk) 22:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
RAF Fighter Command Order of Battle
Hi Nthep; the only mention of The Hardest Day is footnote 6, which is related to a potted description of Sector Stations; these were relevant to the command structure of Fighter Command throughout the battle. The Battle of Britain Then and Now Volume 5 is the primary reference for the unit code letters, squadron names (eg:152 "Hyderabad" Sqn), radio call signs, etc, and confirms which units were officially accredited to Fighter Command during the Battle of Britain; the list of 71 units is on page 255. Again, this was relevant to the entire B of B period. This does not give the locations of the units on 15 September and supplements the information given in Woods and Dempster, which is not listed in the bibliography, nor is there any citation to the book. A note to this effect had been added. Minorhistorian (talk) 22:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
North Staffordshire Regt
Hi you may be inerested in this its from - REGIMENTAL NICKNAMES AND TRADITIONS OF THE BRITISH ARMY - the link is here [1]
--Jim Sweeney (talk) 17:26, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
THE PRINCE OF WALES'S (North
Staffordshire Regiment).
THE 1 st Battalion (64th Foot) was raised in 1 756,
the facings being black. It took part in the
hardest fighting in the West Indies and America,
being engaged there off and on till 1815, reaching
home just too late to take part in the battle of
Waterloo. The regiment was on board the
" Alert," when she was wrecked near Halifax, N.S.,
all ranks remaining below silent and under perfect
discipline, while the vessel was run ashore. Had
the men attempted to reach the deck the vessel
would have foundered. By their discipline everyone
aboard was saved, and the Duke of Wellington
ordered that the details should be published
throughout the Army as an example of discipline.
The 2nd Battalion (98th Foot) was raised in 1 824
and served in the Crimean War. The 98th was
honoured with the title of " Prince of Wales's " in
recognition of the duties performed by the Corps
during the Prince of Wales's visit to Malta.
Nicknamed : " The Black Knots " as distinct
from ' The Staffordshire Knots" of the South
Staffordshire Regiment.
(Depot, Pontefract.) (Record Office, York.)
Th Royal Tiger, superscribed " India."
"Guadaloupe. 1759," "Martinique, 1794," " India, 1 796-
1819." "Nive." "Peninsula." "Arabia," " New Zealand,"
Cap, Blue.
Regimental March, " The York and Lancaster."
Allied Regiment : 5th (Wellington) Regiment of New
Zealand.
Re:North Staffordshire Regiment
No problem. It's not going to be the best copy-edit, but it'll be an improvement. Expect it in a day or two. --Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I hope I didn't mess up with any British Army terminology. :D --Patar knight - chat/contributions 15:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
North Staffordshire Railway
Hi Nthep,
I suggest you have a look at Category:Templates for railway lines of Scotland: try and find a route diagram somewhat similar to what is needed, copy it into a sandbox and play with it. Once you have a route map open, clicking on the legend at the top will give you the individual symbols.
Remember that you are not trying to recreate the line as it actually exists, merely to mimic in straight lines and small curves, such as a "ladder" in two, three, four, five or six "legs", with bits cut out. If you want to play, I'm happy to look at anything that you make between now and Sunday, but not after Sunday.Pyrotec (talk) 19:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've tweaked your diagram to fix the broken lines. Did you see my comments at WT:UKRail? Mjroots (talk) 08:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't see any broken lines beforehand which is why I hadn't chnaged anything. I did see your comments, thnaks. I just haven't got round to starting on all the links to stations. NtheP (talk) 09:35, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.
A few features that you might find helpful:
Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
The project has a stress hotline available for your use.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 03:41, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Skipton
Because it isn't normal to use categories as "see also" items. Anyone listed in the category who isn't in the article should be added, it is then redundant to point to a category which simply lists the people. --JD554 (talk) 13:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That would be a valid argument if Skipton had dozens of notable people in the category. But as a small town it there are only a few which wouldn't be too difficult to add to the article as it stands. --JD554 (talk) 14:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't think that's going to be a problem any time soon given that Skipton has a population of about 15,000 compared to Bradford's of nearer 500,0000 ;) --JD554 (talk) 14:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)
The May 2009 issue of the Military history 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 6113 last month to 6344 on May 30th). We have recently overtaken WP:LONDON which has 6283 articles. WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 38 out of a total number of 1850 articles. In the area of GAs WP:YORKS at 42 is just behind WP:GM with 44.
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
To bring all other top priority articles (currently 15 with 2 at FA) to at least Good article status
To set up a weekly or monthly selected article improvement drive
To produce a regular news letter for circulation to members
Browsers
According to the article Usage share of web browsers the percentage of people using the Mozilla Firefox browser has increased steadily since 2004 and it now stands at 22.56%. The percentage of Wikipedia editors using Firefox is probably considerably higher because the Firefox browser has a number of advantages for editors. Not least of these is the add-on that lets you right click on a web page to get a Cite Web pop up on the menu. WPCITE allows you easily to create a citation template. This makes the laborious task of filling in web citation templates (almost) a thing of the past.
Another advantage of Firefox is the ability to use wikiEd which is a full-featured Wikipedia-integrated text editor that adds enhanced text processing functions to edit pages. And there is a spell checker Currently, wikEd works under Firefox, SeaMonkey, Safari, and Google Chrome, but not under Internet Explorer and Opera.
Mention of these other browsers reminds me that not all browsers render pages in the same way. What appears to be a beautiful layout in one browser can be rendered as a tangled mess of text and images by another. As most browsers can be downloaded for free, it is worth having several on your computer just to check the appearance of articles. Bear in mind that many people who use Wikipedia just for reference will have only Internet Explorer, and possibly quite an old version, so some of the latest "bells and whistles" may not work for them.
My apologies to old hands who already know all this, but to new users it really is worthwhile looking into the possibilities of different browsers on Wikipedia.
September 2011, web browser usage share. Source: Median values from summary table.
The project is subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis. The latest listing was created on March 9th.
Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Infoboxes Many of our articles would benefit from the addition of an appropriate infobox.
As of 30 May, 2009, we have assessed 100% of all articles with a project banner.
(Some new and additional article talk pages may still require a banner however)
Thanks
References Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is always in need of attention. Please take a look and see if you can help. One small edit, such as adding a reference section and reference, to an article each session would make a big difference.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR.
Delivered June 2009 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.
→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 00:13, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Jersey child abuse investigation 2008 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ttonyb1 (talk) 15:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 6344 last month to 6538 on June 28th). We have recently overtaken WP:LONDON which has 6318 articles. WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 39 out of a total number of 1862 articles. In the area of GAs WP:YORKS at 45 is just ahead of WP:GM who have 44.
Thank you and well done to all those who contributed.
Article Activity
Siward Barn was promoted to GA on May 10th Oslac of York was promoted to GA on May 18th Thomas Ferens was promoted to GA on June 6th Wilfred was promoted to FA on June 9th Ilkley was nominated for GA on June 11th Sheffield was nominated for a FAR on June 18th Peak District was nominated for GA on June 18th York was submitted for a peer review on June 21st
Member News
There are now 64 members of WikiProject Yorkshire! A warm welcome to the new members that have joined us since the June newsletter:
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
To bring all other top priority articles (currently 15 with 2 at FA) to at least Good article status
To set up a weekly or monthly selected article improvement drive
To produce a regular news letter for circulation to members
Citing sources for your text
In recent months some really promising Yorkshire articles from new editors have been appearing on Wikipedia. These editors have worked hard to produce interesting and informative texts with some exquisite images. However, some of these articles have lacked any verifiable sources, an absolute must for Wikipedia articles. Additional research is usually necessary to write a good article. An article has to be verifiable and citereliable sources which ideally should include books or peer reviewed journal articles. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.
Fortunately, Wikipedia provides a number of easily used tools to help with this task. Beside the Firefox add on that was mentioned last month there are a couple of toolbar options to help editors.
The first is on the default toolbar. It's the <ref>...</ref> button. This places any text that is placed between the markers in the References section on the article page.
The second handy tool is obtained by going to the my preferences section on the menu tabs at the top of the page, click GADGETS, go to Editing gadgets and check refTools. Save your options and a new CITE button is added to your editing toolbar. This little wonder, when clicked, produces options for citation templates beneath the existing toolbar. It is a fairly simple task then to copy and paste the information into the template and when you've completed as much as you can, click the Add citation button. This produces an inline citation. Of course this all depends on there being a References section on the page with either the <references/> markup or {{Reflist}} template added.
If you are in doubt about an unsourced statement, try copying the phrase or sentence and pasting it into the search box of your favourite search engine. Often this turns up a source which you can then add to the article yourself by filling in one of the citation templates on your editing toolbar. If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, consider tagging a sentence by adding the {{fact}} template, a section with {{unreferencedsection}}, or the article with {{refimprove}} or {{unreferenced}}. Alternatively, you may leave a note on the talk page requesting a source, or you may move the material to the talk page.
Please remember...
The project is subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis. The latest listing was created on June 18th. Here is an extract
The project has 15 top-importance articles. 8 of them, or 53.3%, are flagged for cleanup.
Articles with dead external links (Oct 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2009)
Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Infoboxes Many of our articles would benefit from the addition of an appropriate infobox.
References Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is always in need of attention. Please take a look and see if you can help. One small edit, such as adding a reference section and reference, to an article each session would make a big difference.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR.
Delivered July 2009 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.
→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 00:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
North Staffordshire Regiment GA review
Hi there,
The info you added was just about right, I'd say, though it does need a citation (sorry!). As you can hopefully see, I've carried on reviewing the article, adding hidden comments in the text where I think something needs changing/clarifying. This isn't an ideal way to do it, but it helps me keep track of what I have reviewed.
Overall (based on a quick read) I don't think there will be any problems passing the review, just a few details in need of clarification, and some style issues. I will detail these when I finish giving it a thorough read-through.
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)
The June 2009 issue of the Military history 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
History of Weapons
Dear sir, thanks a bunch for the help. I am really glad that someone took out some time for helping me and appreciating the article. I am reading all your instructions and will soon get back to you after reading the whole stuff. I would definitely need some help from you. Please be in touch. Nefirious (talk) 05:49, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually “Procopius, Agathias and the Frankish Military,” and the author is Bachrach. Sorry for the confusion. And thanks for helping me out with the footnotes and references arrangement. I'll keep in mind the next time I am quoting notes or the references. Nefirious (talk) 13:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done: [2]. --Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:49, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
