Good Olfactory (talk | contribs) Category:Novels by Ed McBain |
→Maths rating: new section |
||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
==Category:Novels by Ed McBain== |
==Category:Novels by Ed McBain== |
||
Re the above category, I wanted to let you know that I've started a full CFD discussion [[Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_February_10#Category:Novels_by_Ed_McBain|here]]. I wanted to notify you because I didn't copy the comments made at [[WP:CFDS|CFD speedy]], so you may want to post a new comment in the new discussion. I explained my rationale in a bit more detail. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 21:33, 10 February 2011 (UTC) |
Re the above category, I wanted to let you know that I've started a full CFD discussion [[Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_February_10#Category:Novels_by_Ed_McBain|here]]. I wanted to notify you because I didn't copy the comments made at [[WP:CFDS|CFD speedy]], so you may want to post a new comment in the new discussion. I explained my rationale in a bit more detail. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 21:33, 10 February 2011 (UTC) |
||
== Maths rating == |
|||
I noticed you added the maths rating template to a few article talk pages. When you do, please fill in all three of the parameters "class", "priority", and "field" per the template docs. The math project already has a [[List of mathematics articles]], and so we don't need to tag the talk pages just to know that the articles exist. The only reason to add the {{tl|maths rating}} template is to assess the article's quality, priority, and field. If you don't feel comfortable doing that, you can leave off the maths rating template, and someone else will get to it eventually. — Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]] · [[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 02:56, 23 February 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:56, 23 February 2011
DYK nomination of Dogdyke Engine
Hello! Your submission of Dogdyke Engine at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! PM800 (talk) 22:50, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Beam_engine
Useful post.There is no reference to any of these facts in Hills 1989. Can you find a few to back up your arguments and then we can integrate all this into the rticle- it will be stronger with it. --ClemRutter (talk) 16:38, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Photos from Flickr
Thank you for adding links to photos on Flickr; however, per WP:EL, these should not really be in the body of the articles, but gathered together into an "External links" section, which normally appears last (after the references, before the navboxes and categories), see MOS:APPENDIX). Thanks. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:03, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
gbmappingsmall template on Stamford Canal
Hi, it is good to see someone looks at the articles I work on! I just wondered what the point of the gbmappingsmall template, which you have added to the point of interest table, is. It seems to take me to an unintelligible page of mapping options, where, if I can work out what to press, I can eventually see just one point in its geographic location, rather than all of the points on the same map. I'd be pleased to understand the logic of it. Regards. Bob1960evens (talk) 16:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, the page is a bit cluttered. Basically you can pick any one of the options on that page and get a map centred on those co-ordinates
- to see all the points you want kml, which is lat/long based instead, and which you already have there.
- I have been heavily criticised in another place and another username for just using OS map references without GBmapping. I understood it was a policy, and made finding pages with OS map references easier in some arcane WP way.. The main use seems to be to locate a point on a map, and in the case of that list it does allow a cross-check of the map ref.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 18:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again. Thanks for the explanation. I have just discovered that you can click on the little globe, and it shows a map over the page, but it doesn't seem to be working very well, as the map gets over-written with "Bad Gateway" messages. That seems to be a general problem, as it is not just the Stamford Canal article that has the problem. Regards. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) The
{{gbmappingsmall}}
template is one of a group which allow an OS grid ref to link to a page (GeoHack) from which you can select a mapping utility. This GeoHack page is exactly the same as the one linked from{{coord}}
, a template which takes latitude/longitude - the only real difference is the way that the coordinates are specified. Note that since both{{gbmappingsmall}}
and{{coord}}
produce code to link to the GeoHack page, both will give the blue globe icon. The GeoHack page gives a choice of several mapping utilities, rather than one, for at least three reasons: (i){{coord}}
could pinpoint a location anywhere in the world, but not all mapping utilities cover everywhere in the world; (ii) different mapping services provide different kinds of detail, which are of varying relevance to the article concerned; (iii) different people prefer different types of map (I liked MultiMap, I don't like Bing); (iv) to favour one above others could run foul of WP:LINKSPAM. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) The
- Hi again. Thanks for the explanation. I have just discovered that you can click on the little globe, and it shows a map over the page, but it doesn't seem to be working very well, as the map gets over-written with "Bad Gateway" messages. That seems to be a general problem, as it is not just the Stamford Canal article that has the problem. Regards. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Stamford Canal crossing River Gwash
Hi, Thanks for the note on the Stamford talk page. I have added some explanation to the article, and there is a picture on the EAWA reference. Bob1960evens (talk) 19:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Pleas join, if you would like to. Rich Farmbrough, 12:50, 1 January 2011 (UTC).
- Done--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 17:27, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Doesn't agree with linked article?
You added a fact template to the article 1753, stating that the fact that Sweden adopted the Gregorian calendar on March 1 doesn't agree with the linked article. However, the article Gregorian calendar states: "Sweden finally adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1753, when Wednesday, 17 February was followed by Thursday, 1 March." So, how do you mean that it doesn't agree with the linked article? /Ludde23 Talk Contrib 16:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- Well, as I read the linked article I thought that the paragaph on using both applied to Sweden and Finland, but on re-reading I can't see why. I'll withdraw the tag--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 20:21, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Lincolnshire-railstation-stub
Robert, I cannot find any record of {{Lincolnshire-railstation-stub}}
being approved (or even proposed) at WP:WSS/P - where is the approval? --Redrose64 (talk) 15:00, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- I created it on to add to the project. I did not attempt any hoop-jumping.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 17:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- A related thread has been raised at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting#UK Railway station stubs to which I have responded. You may wish to comment too. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Category:Novels by Ed McBain
Re the above category, I wanted to let you know that I've started a full CFD discussion here. I wanted to notify you because I didn't copy the comments made at CFD speedy, so you may want to post a new comment in the new discussion. I explained my rationale in a bit more detail. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:33, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Maths rating
I noticed you added the maths rating template to a few article talk pages. When you do, please fill in all three of the parameters "class", "priority", and "field" per the template docs. The math project already has a List of mathematics articles, and so we don't need to tag the talk pages just to know that the articles exist. The only reason to add the {{maths rating}} template is to assess the article's quality, priority, and field. If you don't feel comfortable doing that, you can leave off the maths rating template, and someone else will get to it eventually. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:56, 23 February 2011 (UTC)