User talk:Eopsid

Welcome!

Hello, Eopsid, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  NickelShoe 17:49, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed the redirect you created at Ethan towler, it seems very unlikely to be a useful redirect, and I was wondering what the justification for it is. Thanks, Monty₈₄₅ 20:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An obscure religion in my local area believes a local boy conveniently named Ethan Towler to be God. there is currently no article on this and in my local area Ethan Towler has become a slang term/colloquialism for God. hence I thought it appropriate to have the redirect. Eopsid (talk) 20:09, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response, while someone else may come along and object to it has being too obscure,(and seek deletion) I'll take your word for it and leave it alone. Monty₈₄₅ 20:13, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eopsid. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bedfordshire/Assessment.
Message added 06:49, 9 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Acather96 (talk) 06:49, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You reinstated the text about the murder in Fishermead. But you haven't shown why it is notable. The articles describing the many places in London where street murders have taken place don't bother to mention it. The fact that local papers mention it does not make it notable. Have any nationals taken it up? (ignoring two or three column centimetre 'fillers'? Why did they think that it was remarkable? Because unless you can show notability, it is just noise that should be left out. Please see also WP:RECENT. Please improve this text or revert it yourself. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:56, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The murders are the first thing which appear on google if you search for fishermead. Also it is interesting and remarkable because its a double murder of teenagers from immigrant communities on a council estate in Milton keynes. If the pair had been lets say white and a couple of years younger it would have garnered alot more attention in the national media but it didnt. Saying its unremarkable is basically Missing white woman syndrome. Also it is mentioned on the sites of national papers eg the guardian, the Sun and the mirror. [[1]] [[2]] [[3]] [[4]] Eopsid (talk) 16:12, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eopsid. You have new messages at Talk:Riseley, Bedfordshire.
Message added 23:41, 10 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello there! Thank you for your message. I was in fact on the verge of adding a small section regarding Roger's family however, time restraints unfortunatly got in the way. The reason for the initial removal, however, was in fact due to my opinion on turning it into a character article rather than just an article on the strip as he has featured in several of the spin-offs as a sole character. Feel free to re-add it along the lines of the new character format. Bottomlivefan95 (talk) 13:25, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If you're interested in topics like List of urban areas in the United Kingdom then I hope it's useful, not annoying, if I respectfully point out that Middlesbrough is spelt thus, and does not have an "o" between the "b" and "r". (ermmm ... unless it's in Kentucky). Hope this helps, best wishes, DBaK (talk) 18:31, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou, I would probably not have noticed that unless you pointed it out. Eopsid (talk) 18:39, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're v v welcome. Thank you for the nice reply. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 09:03, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me which buttons to click and what to type in to create an infobox, please! 109.145.30.197 (talk) 18:42, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have to use these brackets { two of them then {{ the name of the infobox your gonna use. They usually have stuff in them eg name = blabla well you put a | before those so |name = blabla most infoboxes have a few of these things. If you do it wrong clicking show preview and the infobox will show you which ones dont have stuff in.

this infobox is missing all the stuff which are inbetween the three of these kind of brackets { so |artist = would be one of the things you would have to put in the infobox. end the infobox with another two brackets }} Eopsid (talk) 19:00, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Nottingham Urban Area, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ripley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Hoot (comics), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foxy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited The Phoenix (comics), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kate Brown (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are taking no account of WP:LEADCITE: "because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body…information in the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely… to require a source". --Old Moonraker (talk) 13:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eopsid. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject East Anglia.
Message added 19:40, 17 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rcsprinter (gas) 19:40, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Unitary authority areas are neither metropolitan nor non-metropolitan counties – in fact, they are not counties from the administrative point of view (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/geography/beginner-s-guide/administrative/england/counties/index.html), although some of them are ceremonial counties, such as Cornwall or Herefordshire. The article non-metropolitan county contains contradictions – the infobox claims everything apart from the 6 metropolitan counties are non-metropolitan counties. However, inside the article there is a clear distinction between non-metropolitan counties and UA areas (see table in the 'Origins' section). There is an additional problem with the version of the article, which you have restored – it mixes up figures for ceremonial counties and administrative divisions. For example, Wiltshire and Swindon are two separate UAs in no way related to each other (at least not administratively), though they are listed under one entry – Wiltshire. There is already another article that lists ceremonial counties (List of ceremonial counties of England), so this one shouldn't. Regards, Delta 51 (talk) 13:00, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you maybe right. I propose changing the name of the article so that it is less cannot be confused with simply meaning counties that are not metropolitan counties. I propose the title List of counties with two tier local goverment in England or List of two-tier counties in England as well as a new article entitled List of Unitary Authorities in England. Eopsid (talk) 13:28, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That might be a good idea. I would even suggest merging this article with List of English counties by area and List of English counties by population into a single article with all county-level units in England listed (metropolitan counties + non-metropolitan counties + unitary authorities + Greater London). Delta 51 (talk) 16:10, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone and done all the things proposed here renaming the List of non-metropolitan counties of England to List of two-tier counties of England, creating List of Unitary Authorities in England and merging List of English counties by area and List of English counties by population. I think the last one could do with a name change as i'm not sure whether unitary authorities are counties. Eopsid (talk) 15:43, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you fix the map, some places like Woolwich don't have a marker on them after I put the co-ordinates in.

Wipsenade (talk) 16:31, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

class=notpageimage|

Location of incidents on 6 and 7 August: Red = 6 August, Yellow = 7 August

Sorry I have no idea how to do co-ordinates. Eopsid (talk) 18:16, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, sorry about making the changes to the template, i have looked up many sources from 2010 and all the ones that i have seen have stated the West Midlands urban area as larger than the Manchester Urban area, i might be wrong but sorry for the confusion, Kramster — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kramster (talk • contribs) 17:10, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The source the template uses clearly lists the Manchester one as the larger although not by much. However the article on List of urban areas in the United Kingdom lists the West Midlands one as the larger however that one uses a different source from 2001. This may have been the source of your confusion. Eopsid (talk) 17:30, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About the Urban areas I think the template on the UK Page should be changed to the largest cities. It would be more relevant for the article, I was just wondering if you knew anyone that would recomend changing it? :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kramster (talk • contribs) 18:59, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Largest cities would probably be worse. There aren't any really good sources for populations of cities in the UK. It's either use urban areas like in this template or use the population of districts (such as this list List of English districts by population and the equivalents for Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland) but that would violate the Wikipedia:No original research policy because it's quite debatable as to what counts as cities and what doesn't notably in the case of a number of metropolitan Boroughs which lack city status but are very much urban in nature and in some cases are more populous than well known cities. There was a template with cities on the UK article originally but it ended up getting removed from the UK article because we decided that the source it used wasn't suitable because it used a lot of Original research to patch up anomalies you can read more here. Eopsid (talk) 19:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Cannock may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ], [[Huntington, Staffordshire|Huntington]], [[Great Wyrley]] and Wedges Mills form <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.nomisweb.co.uk/keystats/sqmap.aspx?kv=1128272714&type=-1&title=Cannock+

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:19, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the article Milton Keynes Urban Area, you have given figures stated to be from the 2011 census without giving a source. Specifically, you show Bletchley separately from Milton Keynes, despite the fact that it is been part of MK for over 40 years. Is this your separation or did the ONS really say that? John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:38, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah the ONS really said that. There is a source for the 2011 census data further down the article. Here is a map of the Bletchley subdivision. [5] And here is the one for the Milton Keynes subdivision clearly showing Bletchley as not part of it [6]. The entirety of the data can be got at here [7] that's the same thing cited in the Milton Keynes Urban Area article.

These subdivisions are pretty arbitrary and I cant see why they decided to separate Bletchley out but not the other constituent towns like Stony Stratford or Wolverton. Eopsid (talk) 20:51, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks - you are a better detective than I am!

The ONS logic for combining/separating areas is given at http://www.nomisweb.co.uk/articles/ref/builtupareas_userguidance.pdf , where they say that a break of 200 metres is enough to start a new area. On page 7 they say that the are using 300m for Milton Keynes (and Redditch). Is the A5 wider than 300m here but not between Stony and Wolverton? Is the A421/Standing Way any wider than e.g., the V8?

I don't really object to them making Bletchley a sub-area but what is silly is to use the name 'Milton Keynes' for the rest of the 'city'. It completely throws out gazeteers and mapping that uses that data to choose precedence/fort size/face. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:40, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the above 200m but below 300m gap is created by the linear parks. You can sort of see it in the picture I linked to above of the Milton Keynes subdivision. It seems some industrial area (OS maps says its Sewage Works) next to Willen and bordering the M1 isn't included in the urban area for some reason. I was looking at this on google maps and it seems they write Bletchley in the same font and size as Milton Keynes implying that it is a separate town. OS maps have Milton Keynes in a clearly larger font. Eopsid (talk) 18:49, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your revisions I live in Greater Manchester in fact right in the center of Manchester, Wigan is part of the wider metro area there, Warrington debatable as to which it belongs to in that list as it is half way between both Liverpool and Manchester, and I was born in Chester, Chester is and never has been part of the Liverpool Metropolitan Area you fucking moron and as you live in Cornwall what the fuck do you know about populations and areas your not a large urban city dweller. West Midlands Birmingham does not have a population 1M larger than Greater Manchester fucking jobs worth

Those metropolitan area articles are mostly sourced from some organization called EPSON they're not perfect but they seem to be the best source on British metropolitan areas. They put Wigan and Warrington as part of Liverpool's metro area, not I. Also I think you'd like to know your post amused me immensely. Living in central Manchester doesn't mean you have knowledge of metro areas there are many people who live there such as pigeons or rats who clearly have no knowledge of metro areas and by your logic they would know more than a expert on the subject who happens to live in Cornwall (Note: I am not an expert on this subject and I don't live in Cornwall either). Also calling me a "fucking jobs worth" isn't very nice and personal attacks such as that aren't approved of on Wikipedia see Wikipedia:No personal attacks. You might also want to check your spelling you spelt jobsworth wrong. Eopsid (talk) 09:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at what was linking to Lazy Jones and then I found List of Beano comic strips. It obviously couldn't have been the same Lazy Jones, so I disambiguated it. From the article's history, I found out that it had originally been disambiguated all OK, but when you updated the list in this edit five and a half years ago, it started linking to the wrong article. What I find funny about this is that no one bothered to check it during five and a half years. JIP | Talk 06:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eopsid. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, are you quite certain about "Five Spunky Duncans"? The only mentions I can find on the internet appear to be copied from List of Dandy comic strips. DuncanHill (talk) 20:09, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? As to whether it exists or not? That article is sourced from a book called the art and history of the Dandy. The book doesnt give much detail on it other than that what is already in that dandy comic strips list and that it is about: the story of five children protecting their family farm from their evil step-uncle until their real uncle from Australia arrives. Eopsid (talk) 02:04, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eopsid. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Largest Urban Areas of the United Kingdom has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 15:26, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eopsid. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eopsid, I know we don't see eye to eye on certain things recently but I feel we can agree on this one. I think the page Heavy Wollen District should be either deleted or merged into Kirklees and Wakefield District as the page has no sources to verify it and it's based on newspapers and websites for businesses. I think this page should be deleted as only mention of it is a junior cricket team. What do you think? RailwayJG (talk) 10:22, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy Woollen District sorry RailwayJG (talk) 10:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RailwayJG (talk) Do you want to create it as an article for deletion rather than a prod so we can get more input? There's instructions how to do it here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you need help with how to do this let me know. Whether it should be deleted depends on how well sourced it is, I'll have a look through the article's sources. Eopsid (talk) 11:46, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay if you want to Eopsid. It definitely is badly sourced. Looked through them. But yeah I think it should be deleted or merged as the article has no strong stance RailwayJG (talk) 12:22, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eopsid could you watch the heavy Woollen District article for a brief while until a concensus has been reached as an anon deleted the nomination for deletion on a personal matter and not a constructive one. Cheers RailwayJG (talk) 22:24, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not trying to edit war, I am trying to rebuild the entire lede for Boro so that we can try and satisfy the "muh Middlesbrough" people who loved their BUASD and the traditionalists who prefer to use the historical population boundaries. The plan will be to move the 174k ref to a new paragraph about the economic / industrial area - if you can be patient with me. Cheers. Koncorde (talk) 08:12, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Koncorde ([[User talk:Koncorde|talk]), in regard to your recent edits its misleading to list Middlesbrough's urban population as the BUASD. The urban population is the whole urban area which is Teesside. Eopsid (talk) 16:35, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, I will bear in mind the need to segregate/delineate the Teeside Urban vs BUASD more clearly. Koncorde (talk) 16:52, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography#Merge_or_deletion_of_the_Sheffield_Urban_Area_and_West_Yorkshire_Urban_Area RailwayJG (talk) 18:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RailwayJG (talk) I will join in the debate, but i have the uk geography article on my watch list so I'd already spotted your new discussion Eopsid (talk) 18:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough RailwayJG (talk) 18:24, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Eopsid, sorry to bug you but was just wondering. If you saw my reply to your merge discussion? Was wondering if you agreed with me on my Borough of Slough post with it being slightly notable like with Blackburn with Darwen etc...Langley is unparished like Slough but both are towns and there is also a big urban area around Slough with a number of villages in Buckinghamshire and Berkshire. I be up for a discussion about my article but Slough (unlike Luton) has got some notable areas and Langley and Brands Hill which I believe is part of Slough? DragonofBatley (talk) 14:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I saw it. I will respond when I'm free. Eopsid (talk) 16:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Eopsid no problem at all cheers DragonofBatley (talk) 17:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of largest towns in England without a railway station, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of largest towns in England without a railway station (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your edit to the disambiguation page Brickhill (disambiguation). However, please note that disambiguation pages are not articles; rather, they are meant to help readers find a specific article quickly and easily. From the disambiguation dos and don'ts, you should:

• Only list articles that readers might reasonably be looking for
• Use short sentence fragment descriptions, with no punctuation at the end
• Use exactly one navigable link ("blue link") in each entry
  • Only add a "red link" if used in existing articles, and include a "blue link" to an appropriate article
• Do not pipe links (unless style requires it) – keep the full title of the article visible
• Do not insert external links or references

apologies for the template but I hope the overview is handy, regards Widefox; talk 12:14, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Don't worry, you've done absolutely nothing wrong here. :) I've just reported another editor, and I mentioned you in the process - and as I'm sure you know, when you mention other editors in ANI you must notify them all. But once again, you've done nothing wrong at all. :)

Cheers, 2A02:8084:F1BE:9180:D112:1D3D:6847:ABEB (talk) 00:16, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Minnie the Minx, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]