Hello, Kim Traynor! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! ww2censor (talk) 02:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content Miscellaneous User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Just dropping in to say what delightful work you have been doing on the article :) Ottawa4ever (talk) 11:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good work with the pics for the above. Had been thinking it looked a little bare for some time. Brendandh (talk) 13:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you rotate the picture used in the Rough Wooing sometime please, otherwise very nice.Unoquha (talk) 14:22, 13 December 2011 (UTC) Many thanks!Unoquha (talk) 18:56, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is not usually necessary to specify the size of images in articles. See Wikipedia:Image use policy#Displayed image size, which says:

In general, do not define the size of an image unless there is a good reason to do so: some users have small screens or need to configure their systems to display large text; "forced" large thumbnails can leave little width for text, making reading difficult. In addition, forcing a "larger" image size at say 260px will actually make it smaller for those with a larger size set as preference.

It is usually best just to set the option for "thumb". Also see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Images. --Vclaw (talk) 03:08, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Edinburgh Don't know if you are interested in joining it or not but I think you would have a lot to offer this project given your location and your variety of related photographs.RafikiSykes (talk) 01:23, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Traynor, I will continue to make any changes I see fit to Wikipedia as that is its very nature. The changes you have complained about I made in good faith. I replaced images of either low quality or ones that I thought did not represent the subject matter well enough. I can see you have a vested interest in the articles and your work is valued but please avoid attacking individuals personally because you disagree with them. Implying I was not being sensible was rather rude and quite frankly ill-informed. The image you seem to like for Edinburgh Castle is good but it does not show the castle in the context of its surroundings and it it does display considerable perspective distortion. I replaced it with what I saw as a photo that would meet Quality Image guidelines in that it provided a technically sound, high resolution view of the castle that clearly illustrated the castle, even today, dominates the skyline of the city. So while you may have disagreed with this rationale it is indeed sensible. Saffron Blaze (talk) 20:50, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see that you found that, have been hunting for a free use image. You don't have one of the spurs too? Brendandh (talk) 21:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Kim. I just dropped by to let you know that Wikipedia guidelines require that your signature must link either to your talk page or your user page. Yours does not do so at present, so it needs to be fixed. Thanks, -- Dianna (talk) 00:03, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. I came across a conversation you'd taken part in, and note with disappointment that your sig doesn't wikilink. Is this deliberate? -- Trevj (talk) 19:53, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Whatever the reason, it isn't deliberate. Kim Traynor 22:15, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

OK - it sounds as if you might want the links back. Have you changed the default sig at Special:Preferences? If the default text is replaced but you still want the wikilink(s), the "Treat the above as wiki markup" box needs ticking. You could perhaps also think about reverting to the 4 February 2011 version. -- Trevj (talk) 13:05, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. I've ticked the box as suggested, so I'll sign this post now and the signature with link should appear. Kim Traynor 13:10, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I see it hasn't, so there's something I am not understanding about the way the preferences should be set. I have now entered Kim Traynor (Talk) in the box Kim Traynor (Talk) 13:13, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

You need the [[ markers as well, exactly like in that 2011 post should work. -- Trevj (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Testing now with brackets User:Kim Traynor 19:48, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Testing again -Kim Traynor (talk) 19:59, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrying -Kim Traynor (talk) 20:01, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And again --Kim Traynor (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! -- Trevj (talk) 00:22, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks (but why is talk appearing in bold and not a link? I copy and pasted the 4 February entry, yet it appears differently now from how it appeared then. Very puzzling) --Kim Traynor (talk) 00:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's explained at WP:How to fix your signature#Wikilink behavior You can use User talk:Kim Traynor#top for the talk link as a workaround if you like. -- Trevj (talk) 06:45, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for that link and your suggestion. I don't grasp how all this works, but it seems to be displaying sufficienly correctly now. I've much appreciated your help! Kim Traynor | Talk 10:46, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the Glasgow Sir Walter Scott Monument pic. It looks like he's got a pigeon and some questionable looking guys keeping him company. ;) I added categories to the pic on commons. INeverCry 21:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A seagull is atleast a slight step up from a pigeon. I liked seeing the Thomas Campbell statue and the Burns material as well BTW. INeverCry 01:25, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In your most recent post in the discussion at Talk:Nazism which begins "I agree that Luther influenced" you appear to be replying to your own comment. If you wish to learn correct indentation, which greatly aids readability of discussion threads, check out WP:INDENT. If you know this and simply made an error, disregard. Cheers! __meco (talk) 21:29, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Salut ! I saw the silly comment you wrote on your last edit to the above article: « someone, out of ignorance, changed 'Maries' to 'Marys' because that's the modern spelling (also present), so reverting ». -- Frankly, both spellings are correct. You chose the version preferred by the OBB, Randolph, Silber, Land and a couple of other good musicological sources, which is fine. However, there are probably more quality sources with « Marys » (which I will not even begin to cite, for I am certain you must know them.) I have no plans to revert anything so petty. --- In the French (and Latin) language, « y » historically is a foreign (Greek-Saxon) letter (literally called « Greek I » in Latinate languages), hence the spelling Marie. The letter « w » is also a historically non-French, non-Latin letter. However, the English language is riddled with y's (and w's). The English language generally forms plurals of word ending with Y by S, as in « days, byes, toys » (and not « daies, bies, toies »). --- In the article, since the historical Saxon « Fower » spelling was preferred, I thought I would be strictly consistent with using a Greco-Saxon Y in « Marys », rather than Latinate « Four » and « Maries ». --- I am happy you prefer the historically French Catholic inspired plural « Maries » as well, but please be aware, my choice of the Saxon plural « Marys » for the article had a scholarly and musicological basis, and was not made out of ignorance. (No reponse necessary. Please forgive my grammatical errors.) Tchao ! Charvex (talk) 06:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You good also check out the template {{sic}} but it's a bit hard to know what goes on. 11:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnmperry (talk • contribs)

Hallo Kim, I've had a go at drafting an article on Viewfield House. I'm not thrilled with it but it may be a start. Anything you feel like doing (adding, editing, pruning, rewording...) would be very welcome. Maybe you know other editors from the Dunfermline area?

All the best Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kim, when you moved your user page to Dean Bridge, the old page is replaced with a Redirect. All I did was to go to the page and replace its text with your old text. Going to the page is 2 steps - 1) try to go to Kim Traynor as usual, and get redirected to Dean Bridge. 2) Click on the link "Redirected from Kim Traynor" at the top, and there you are. Then it's just editing as usual. Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:18, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... I spoke too soon. I've done a copy-and-paste (sorry) to put all this text here, the user page was also redirected.

For next time, I suggest you don't edit and move your user page but a sub-page of it - less confusion! You make a sub-page called Fred by putting /Fred on your user page. When you click on the resulting redlink, /Fred opens as a new empty sub-page in your user space - ahh! you can have as many pages there as you like, as long as they're within the rules, legal decent etc - and then when you move /Fred to Fred Bridge in mainspace, nothing nasty happens to your userpage. Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:26, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kim, I'm sorry to intrude, and especially to cause you confusion. What I meant to say was, to create a subpage link, you put [[/Fred]] on a page; it will appear as a redlink. Please feel free to ask: if I can help, I will. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:18, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

	The Original Barnstar
	For sterling work on Dean Bridge , Forth Bridge and more. Keep it up! Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:16, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposed article regarding Younger's contained both the article proper and the request to have it moved to main space. They should rightly be on separate pages, so I've split it (and the edit history) with the article at User:Kim Traynor/Fred and the request at User talk:Kim Traynor/Fred. Favonian (talk) 11:01, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your assistance and for keeping me informed.Kim Traynor 11:52, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello Kim, thanks for your message. I entirely understand your frustrations with the user in question. I'll endeavour to get my head around the content and recent discussion on the above page. I'll be away for most of this week, with possibly only very limited internet access, so my comments on this may be a little slow in coming. However, I too think that some action will be required to resolve this. Given some of their recent actions, I think this user will fall on his/her own sword soon. Hang in there! Best, Malljaja (talk) 17:45, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

agreed, if you can just hang on, and not get into the battle your logic will prevail. it takes time for others to review, and it is so much faster to just pick out inflammatory language (however appropriate) and rule against that party without evr addressing the dispute. be an android, free of emotion, focus only on the subject, not the editor, otherwise you will end up like me, every edit i make is trolled by several users and many times reverted.(although several of my edits and original articles remain :) Darkstar1st (talk) 21:22, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

Hi Kim, I have rather bravely taken it upon myself to manually publish this article, overwriting the redirect page to do it. I have explained my reasons - which probably agree quite a lot with your appeal - on the Talk:Younger's page. They do keep telling me, "Be Bold!". You look like an experienced enough user to check and see if I left anything undone which needed to be done. I blanked the AfC page manually. David_FLXD (Talk) 14:34, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kim, Interesting mural on the Quintinshill page. Can you give me some more info. on it please? JackGC Jack 12:52, 5 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GC Jack (talk • contribs)

Thanks Kim for the reply. I'll look into it when I next go to LeithGC Jack 11:53, 6 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GC Jack (talk • contribs)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

News reports are fine. We just need to see some evidence of reliable, independent, secondary sources. If the Map has received newspaper coverage then cite the newspaper articles. For example, This one probably has some useful information to add to your article. I declined it because, like you say, it relies mainly on one source and gives the impression it is promoting the campaign to restore it, rather than write an encyclopedic summary of its importance. Best of luck! Sionk (talk) 01:49, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just browsing through AFC the other day I found your article and found it fascinating! I was tempted to approve it (but have no experience of AFC) but I also saw there was little external coverage. Just now (and coincidentally) I have seen your unfruitful discussion with RHaworth (and his grudging view that the article was suitable for main space!). Have no other newspapers reported on it, even if thay are not online? My message here is really to give a bit of moral support. The few articles I have created I have always done directly but this has become increasingly problematic. It is tragic that in the attempt to stop rubbish articles we have almost closed off the creation of responsible articles. Thincat (talk) 09:58, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I got your reply while Googling. Here are some references that may help.[1][2][3][4][5][6] Yes, I remember Younger's. I was a student in Edinburgh in the 1960's. I drank McEwan's but I now see it was all the same brewery. Thincat (talk) 10:52, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking more about your reply. I think you need at least two external references establishing notability, WP:GNG, and these could be only discussing the restoration. Then you need references to support the factual content and these need not be external and can be passing mentions, WP:V. Thincat (talk) 11:10, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm really pleased so I'll read it all over again. I tend to lurk at WP:Deletion review and to a lesser extent WP:Articles for deletion which is where I picked up some arcane practical details of article notability and verification. Thincat (talk) 15:49, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mapa Scotland, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sionk (talk) 14:03, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see, I've moved your fascinating article to Wikipedia's main article space. Well done so far! It will make a good candidate for Wikipedia's "Did You Know" feature, but this needs to be submitted within 5 days. I'll happily do that, but it would help if you could provide an inline citation for the claim that Mapa Scotland is the largest relief map in the world. That seems to be one of the 'headline' facts upon which the 'DYK' submission can be based. Keep up the good work! Sionk (talk) 14:36, 11 July 2012 (UTC) P.S. I'll keep an eye on your talk page, so it will be best if you reply here, if need be. Sionk (talk) 14:38, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it would be good for DYK and agree about the headline. There's all sorts of relief maps claiming to be the largest (I am investigating) but the article only claims the restorers claim this. Anyway, I have done a bit of editing on the size of the thing. I shall put any further remarks on the talk page. Looks good! Thincat (talk) 17:00, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A reviewer at 'Did You Know' has pointed out that the last paragraph in the 'History' section is unsourced. I've managed to source the first sentence, but can you help with the remainder - maybe it is all from the Scotland in Scotland PDF? It's a bit confusing because the S in S PDF says the idea was Tomasik's, while the newspaper sources (for example in Southern Reporter) say it was conceived by General Maczek... maybe they think it makes better news to say that?! Either way, the paragraph needs a couple of inline citations, to satisfy DYK. All the best. Sionk (talk) 12:02, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bad time for me. I'm about to go abroad on holiday and after putting my car in a safe place have lost its keys and my house keys, all in the space of a 250 yards walk along a straight path. So, right now I'm phoning the police, insurance etc rather than thinking about the article. The point you raise is interesting. I pointed out to Roger Kelly (that's the chap who runs the mapascotland.makers website, based on his own researches and conversations with veterans) that the map looked more like the work of Tomasik than Maczek. It's obvious the restoration group want to publicise the connection with Maczek because of his fame, but it seemed clear to me (reading between the lines) that Tomasik brought the map about. Roger Kelly indicated that no-one knows for sure who had the idea first. What does seem clear is that the Krakow Professor was initially a contact of Maczek rather than Tomasik. Signs installed by the Mapa Scotland group at the site advertise it as Maczek's Map. The three reasons given for the map's construction, which you've pointed out are unsourced, are really hand-me-down knowledge that I have probably divined from reading the Szewczuk account. I don't think Tomasik has left any account of his reasons, but he was obviously commemorating the wartime connection with the Poles and working in league with Maczek. Maybe we need a probably, perhaps or seems somewhere around that sentence. If not, consider deleting it until we have firmer evidence. I believe Roger Kelly knows relatives of Tomasik, so i could go back to him and ask for confirmation (but that would not produce an external source). Now back to my fifth walk along the path looking for my keys. Kim Traynor (talk) 14:18, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked following. Szewczuk says, "[Tomasik] wanted to celebrate Barony Castle’s part in modern Scottish history and the Polish contribution to it." Roger Kelly says, "General Maczek and his companions conceived The Great Polish Map of Scotland as a permanent three-dimensional reminder of Scotland’s hospitality to the Polish Forces." I've probably used these two reasons and inserted the third based on the fact that Tomasik was friends with the General during his years in Edinburgh. Kim Traynor (talk) 14:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think (I hope) that I've managed to resolve that difficulty with a rephrasing and a reference. Ideally, we need to track down Tomasik's family and ask them if they know the precise reasons he had for building the map. That's something I'll try to do after my return. Kim Traynor (talk) 15:20, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. At least the offending paragraph has some inline citations, which should be adequate for the DYK reviewers. As for your own investigations, by all means go ahead with these, but don't add your own original research to the article. Cite published facts only. Anyway, problem solved I think. have a good holiday! Sionk (talk) 15:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that. I just like to get to the root of things. I'm used to shooting off emails for confirmation and verification of facts; so much so that I'm no longer quite sure what actually constitutes a 'fact'. Kim Traynor (talk) 17:20, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see your edit here, you made a big mistake. The correct term is "carabiniere (for one) - carabinieri (for many)", NOT "carabiniero". Thanks --Allions (talk) 10:17, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! By the way, can you edit this image covering the car license plate number? you can do it with paint or some others program. Thanks. --Allions (talk) 08:07, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well the number "112" is not the number of the patrol like in the US police cars but is the emergency number to call the "carabinieri" in Italy (like "911" in USA). In the italian wiki images we usually delete the car license plate (for example: Carabinieri Car) to prevent the possibility that the image is used by criminal organizations against the people in the image or against the institution. However no problem, i can modify for you the image.

Another thing: the "classic pose" is not used only by the carabinieri, in Italy is commonly used as "waiting pose" by everyone. Greetings!--Allions (talk) 15:11, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No need to bother your wife, i've edited the image deleting the car plate number. Regarding the "pose" the only official pose are the military one: "At Attention", "Stand at Ease", the "Salute" etc. The pose you describe is commonly used but not "formally" and always used. If you have any other question fell free to ask! Greetings! ;) --Allions (talk) 17:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I requested the deletion of the first version of the file here. If you want write down something in the page. Then it should be everything ok. Keep up the good work! --Allions (talk) 21:39, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First version deleted, new version kept! Everything fine then, cya ;) --Allions (talk) 16:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - glad you liked the article. She was quite a character! Rosserllwyd (Roger) Rosser Gruffydd 12:31, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Luckenbooths, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You did good work with creating Jordan Burn, which I was pleased to review. I added a talk page with the appropriate templates. If you create other new articles, I would appreciate it if you would consider learning how to create talk pages with appropriate WikiProject templates. In many instances there are like articles with existing templates that can be copied. --DThomsen8 (talk) 04:34, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw your question on my talk, apologies for the long delay in reply, but unfortunately, I'm not particularly familiar with the geography of Scotland, and I don't remember when I first created the Braid Burn article where I got the information to start the article from (it was a while ago). But (I'm sure by now that you've found out from other users) there were a number of additional edits on the article by others who are probably more knowledgable. Once again, apologies. J.P.Lon (talk) 14:18, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(a) page numbering is the outcome of the {{rp}} template - basically you can specify anything. Or omit it entirely of course. I wasn't quite sure about your source - was it a book as such, or a journal, or an encyclopedia? I chose to {{cite book|...}} although perhaps a different citation style would be better. In {{cite journal}} for example the page numbers are held inside the citation. You should check out the various styles, choose what you think best. You can do that by writing template:cite book (etc.) in the search box. (One trouble with wikipedia I find is that within its 4 million+ pages it holds what you want to know, it's all a question of finding it.) The fact that volume details are in bold is one of the products of the {{cite}} family templates, and I presume adheres to the preferred citation style, together with things such as italics or not. Maybe choosing journal rather than book would change it. Basically I was just showing you how to have multiple references, and also introducing you to the idea of formal citations. Change it as you see fit.

(b) not as far as I know. Twice in the same day people have asked for help on the help page, and I saw them only because I needed help myself. Just regular research throws up plenty of examples, and then I take it upon myself to straighten out the terrible ones. Same as correcting spelling mistakes, bad grammar and wrong punctuation. Rather than just leave it, I correct it as I find it. That's what wikipedia is about - articles are not "owned", so all users have equal rights to change. I don't usually alter facts, unless I know they're not facts at all. In any case, reversion is always possible, so a user who really takes umbrage could roll back.

John of Cromer in China (talk) mytime= Mon 07:01, wikitime= 23:01, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's the formal way of a citation. I suppose you could move the volume details to be part of the title. Or you could investigate {{font}} where you can change the style, size etc. of the text. John of Cromer in China (talk) mytime= Mon 07:38, wikitime= 23:38, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I was living in one of the "new" blocks, but that was 1998 so maybe they've been replaced. There was a health centre nearby. Quite near the actual bridge. I was working on contract to Standard Life - started off in a B+B in Leith, working in Annandale Street (I think), then the office moved to the other end of Princes Street, and I rented a room in Saunders Street. Nice walk to work, although uphill. China is 12 hours by plane from the west, 50 years behind in everything!

I remember the first time I went to Edinburgh, on the train. I thought I'd walk from Waverley station despite the horizontal February rain! I needed directions when I got to some large green space in Leith, but I saw a police station nearby, so went in and asked. The policeman there told me, and sent me on. As I was walking down the steps I thought "Thus, the Leith police dismisseth us!" BTW I have a bound volume of William McGonegal's work, but that's in Cromer and I'm not.

Re: referencing, basically you're free to do what you think best, as is everybody. It might be better to change it from book to journal in which case the page numbers are held within the citation. The other parameters are the same.

Another thing I have done is build a page of reference books which I come across frequently - History of the Philippines (citations), (Philippines is my current 'bag') then I can transclude them in where I need them. That way they always come out the same. Citations can take quite a lot of effort, but once done they're done. John of Cromer in China (talk) mytime= Mon 10:22, wikitime= 02:22, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I received this note on my page rather than yours:

(talk page stalker) As far as using the reference pages template outside of reused named references, that is standard to have them this way. Alternatively, instead of {{rp|14}} which gives you :14, you can use {{rp|page=14}} which will give you (p14). For multiple pages use {{rp|pages=14–23}} which gives you (pp14–23). Just need to keep it consistent in the article. Hope this helps some. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 03:02, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

What you can do instead is have additional parameter "pages" with the {{cite journal}}, e.g. pages = pp 14–21. Because it's just half a dozen-ish pages I think it would be OK just to reference the whole article (several times) and expect the reader to read it all. John of Cromer in China (talk) mytime= Mon 11:20, wikitime= 03:20, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My experience is almost the mirror image of yours - I lived in Ealing from age 10 to age 23, then after getting married, moved to Acton for another 7 years. Then to Richmond/Twickenham (for another 25 or more). And when I was in Stockbridge in high summer, still daylight at 10pm or so, and the binmen were doing the rounds early (or late, depending on your point of view). John of Cromer in China (talk) mytime= Mon 19:20, wikitime= 11:20, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I went to Ealing Grammar School (as was). Next to Ealing studios, if they're what you're thinking of. Backing onto Walpole Park, on Ealing Green, opposite The Grove, but I didn't think there was anything residential overlooking it. Or there were some BBC rehearsal studios near N Acton station. John of Cromer in China (talk) mytime= Tue 14:48, wikitime= 06:48, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the improvements Mercat Cross, Edinburgh. I have removed one fact and asked for a conformation for another because I am not sure where you obtained the information. The first is

• "A monument now stands there in the form of a replica" -- how do you know it is a replica?
• "This was paid for by William Gladstone..." -- how do you know he paid for it.

If we need to discuss this further please do so on talk:Mercat Cross, Edinburgh -- PBS (talk) 21:06, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a photo of the monument, as to Gladstone please add whatever citation you think best meets the citation needed requirement. -- PBS (talk) 22:44, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Mercat Cross, Edinburgh#December 2012 -- PBS (talk) 00:25, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clan Gregor

• "was hanged at Edinburgh’s Mercat Cross in January 1604"

Yes because he was hanged at the cross before it went walkabout. As we discussed before it is now close to the original location and we know for certain it was not at the pavement site in 1604. -- PBS (talk) 16:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kim, I notice you have uploaded a series of images of the Stenhousemuir Carronades to Geograph and Commons (such as File:Stenhousemuir_carronade.JPG). These are all mislabelled, as there is no Buttquoy street it's King Street - this was a mistake on the part of Google maps data provider possibly because King Street forms two parallel roadways (one pedestrianised where the cannons are)

Google has now fixed this error, though a few other mapping agencies using the old underlying data may still have errors. But at the moment it looks like most google hits point back to one of your images and I wondered if it was possible for you to correct them? Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 09:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For however many typo fixes in Edinburgh, thank you. I trust you know it is on hold for a week whilst the referencing is improved, with which help would be appreciated. Jamesx12345 (talk) 21:04, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say I agree with your sentiments regarding the history section. Now that there is a History of Edinburgh, it makes sense to make the section the Edinburgh article less of a history of Scotland. This should be a very broad article, so the history section should be reduced in depth and scope to cut it down a bit as it will take, by my reckoning ~1 minute to load on a dial-up connection.Jamesx12345 (talk) 22:08, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If they had worded it a bit better and included proper references, amongst other things, I might have thought differently. But anyway, no worries. Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 17:41, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

x -PBS (talk) 08:25, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated my photograph of a Wemyss ware cat for deletion since it clearly isn't one! It was given to my wife's great grandparents as a wedding present in 1895. I have done a bit of research and it seems that you are correct, that it is an Émile Gallé cat! I will re-upload image with revised name and details. Thanks for the heads up. All good wishes.Theroadislong (talk) 21:40, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kim. I reverted your last edit on the Pineapple, but I am very far from 100% sure that I am right, and I have not been able to find anything in the MOS to confirm or deny my view. I've raised it at WT:MOSCAPS#First letter of a caption in the hope of gaining some clarification, and I wondered if you might want to pitch in there. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 08:30, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree, these are AFAIK unique to Scotland in their style. Especially the old burghs and Lowlands.-MacRùsgail (talk) 21:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can not comment on the proposed merger unless you post a message to all the people who took part in this previous proposed merge Talk:Market cross#Proposed merge with Mercat cross. I suggest also that you include the people who took place in the 2007 debate: Talk:Mercat cross#Merge article with Market Cross. (see WP:CANVAS). -- PBS (talk) 08:23, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would oppose such a merger. Coming from Devon and living in Scotland I feel that I appreciate and recognise the distinctive differences as outlined above. If the Market Cross article had been thoroughly researched these practical differences would be apparent. Combining the articles would just confuse the issue. The attachment of jougs, etc originally led me to this Scottish phenomenon of Mercat Crosses. A suggestion to make this a global article is perhaps a little unrealistic and lacks focus on the cultural significance and traditions involved. I feel that the proposer should permit these articles to keep their individual identities without further adverse pressure. Rosser Gruffydd 10:45, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

PS. Old Enemy - I will be delivering a St Andrew's Day address at the Jolly Beggars Burns Club in Beith as President of the Irvine Burns Club to try and show how many cultural and historical links the Southrons and Scots have. Rosser Gruffydd 10:45, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Message for Rosser Gruffydd (if you see it at all - I don't know how to send it to you otherwise). Appreciate your comments. Think your paragraph above would be a worthwhile addition to the Market Cross discussion page. [later add: I've just seen that you have indeed posted it] I'm not a Scottish nationalist except in a cultural sense. I'm quite comfortable with the idea that the Southrons (good word - we should bring it back) and the ethnic Angles north of the border, if I can put it like that, have much in common; but I do dislike the apparent non-acceptance of a separate page on Scottish mercat crosses that seems to imply they can't constitute a separate topic in their own right. Best wishes for a successful Burns Club event. You seem to be more integrated into Scottish society than me. I wonder if that's typical of Ayrshire? Kim Traynor | Talk 00:53, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on biased users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large.

As PBS pointed out, seeking wider participation is appropriate, but these [7] and [8] are clearly not per WP:CANVASS / WP:Votestacking . I notice this to PBS [9] was more neutral, but still canvassing. I see you ignored PBS's advice, and failed to contact the other editors User:Johnbod User:Frozenport User:Wikiwayman User:Scarymonstersandsupercreeps with opposing views. Feeling passionately about the topic is great, bordering on WP:OWN not so good, but subverting consensus building, especially as you're an experienced editor here, tends to put others off. That's killed what little I cared about this, I wish to have nothing more to do with the discussion. I hope you can reflect on this. Widefox; talk 12:49, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mea culpa. I did indeed try to enlist the support of those I assumed would prefer not to see the market cross and mercat cross pages merged. As regards Wikipedia guidelines on this being an unacceptable practice, I'm afraid I'm someone who habitually doesn't read terms & conditions (nor do I plan to start doing so for the reason that life's too short). So, I accept your admonition and offer my apology. I don't want to spoil the party and shall be happy to keep my own counsel from here on. I still hope that the merger does not take place for the reasons I've advanced. (It isn't to do with a sense of page ownership; it's to do with Scotland's mercat crosses being recognised as a topic in their own right - I'd be very happy if others would throw more light on them.) You shouldn't withdraw in disgust. Kim Traynor | Talk 13:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I want to oppose this proposed merge I have informed everyone but one blocked user who may not have been informed about this merger (and a couple who probably were already aware). KT if you do something in good faith which when pointed out to you to be a clear breach of guidelines or policy, you ought to try to fix it, both because it is a right thing to do, and also depending on the severity of the breach not doing so can entangle you in a lot of needless bureaucracy that a quick rectification will halt. -- PBS (talk) 16:00, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How would you suggest I rectify the action which caused the complaint? Kim Traynor | Talk 17:31, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. It is a lovely place, one of the fvourite of my son. I'm from Spain but usually I spend my holidays in your Country. Thank you again, --Nachosan (talk) 03:07, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The translation looks good, a capstone for the article. -- PBS (talk) 07:10, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kim, you may be interested to know that Edinburgh Castle is under GA review here, any assistance you care to provide will be gratefully received! Many thanks, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 14:58, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I see you've been busy, thanks! Only thing is since you've made over 100 separate edits its hard to keep track of what's changed... Could you summarise on the GA review page which points you think are addressed and which still outstanding so other can see what remains to be done? Many thanks, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 09:54, 9 October 2013 (UTC) PS I've started doing this...[reply]

Certainly not proposing to undo any of your work... :) Though I'm just up to the bit about Ptolemy - I cant recall the sources but not sure that it does appear on the map? Is this in Harris' book? Happy to stand corrected. Thanks, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 10:24, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Use "<s>strikeout</s>" to get strikeout. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 10:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Quarter Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Edinburgh Castle (estimated annual readership: 263,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Quarter Million Award. Congratulations on this accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. 16:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

The Quarter Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

This editor won the Quarter Million Award for bringing Edinburgh Castle to Good Article status.

Well done! 16:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

		Medieval Barnstar
		For all your work on Edinburgh Castle - great article! Hchc2009 (talk) 18:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kim, I'd like to firmly endorse the above award! I had just found some time to work on the article but when i logged in I found it all wrapped up and already promoted. Great effort and many thanks! Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 15:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably copyright-free, because several online print sellers are offering copies of it. I was hesitant because I couldn't find out where the original is. If it is copyrighted, there's another version of the same picture (apparently a working-sketch of some sort), at the University of Indiana, which could be substituted. WQUlrich (talk) 00:08, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BBC News today has an item on the Forth Bridge[10] which I seized on to support a move discussion at Talk:Forth Rail Bridge. Anyway, I happened to see you credited for the photo which I then tracked down to Geograph.[11] I remember your name from when we were working on Great Polish Map of Scotland a while back. You've taken a lot of photos, good ones too, so it's nice to see one being used prominently. As a family we visited Edinburgh a couple of weeks ago and it was good to see the bridge without scaffolding and all rest of it. Best wishes. Thincat (talk) 10:35, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! They've gone and replaced it with a video. Your photo is still there but small and unattributed on the Scotland news page.[12] Thincat (talk) 13:54, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My TUSC account

You have added some fantastic pictures, but often there is not room for them within the guidelines at WP:IMAGE without removing something. I put the carving taken out of Scottish art and put it in Scottish Reformation. I was also thinking about an article on sculpture in Scotland and I think it could be a very useful image there. All the best.--SabreBD (talk) 00:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you might know me I am quite a well-known Leith Historian as well as Wikipedia editor. You have added a picture of the mural on North Junction Street and labelled it as Edinburgh's second Pals Battalion... but this is wrong... they are unconnected apart being Royal Scots battalions... see the main article on the Gretna Disaster and the list of Pals Battalions. The Edinburgh Pals were primarily the 15th and 16th with the 17th as reserves... largely killed on the Somme. The soldiers killed at Gretna were a service battalion 1st/7th... they were known as the "Leith Battalion" but this was due to their origins ... they predate WW1 and were NOT a pals battalion... they were regulars. Your photo is therefore good but is inappropriately tagged here and is not relevant to the Pals Battalion article ----Stephencdickson (talk) 17:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC) Apologies ... I now see this was not you... just your photo ----Stephencdickson (talk) 17:08, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, many thanks for uploading File:Charles Darwin plaque, Lothian Street, Edinburgh.JPG which is an excellent addition to the Charles Darwin's education article. One thing, from ancient memory the plaque isn't so much behind Old College as fixed to the adjacent Chambers Street Museum (now part of the National Museum of Scotland, the wall of the lecture theatre if memory serves me well. See File:Royal Museum rear.JPG, the plaque appears to be just over the doorway. Out of interest, the street layout when Darwin got there is shown in this town plan. I've tried to clarify the wording on the CD article. . dave souza, talk 12:51, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's a great picture of the Edinburgh Trams at Shandwick Place! Thanks very much for adding it. RGloucester — ☎ 13:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cute article at James Gillespie (philanthropist).

Bearian (talk) 21:01, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the main while I added your picture here, Dog breed - and here - Dog breeding, because it illustrates a point there quite nicely. Added them also on Selective breeding, my guess is they probably stay, because that is exactly what this picture illustrates. Hafspajen (talk) 10:40, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File is now at File:Granite Setts.jpg. I don't understand some of your comments, and they leave me wondering if maybe you misunderstood me. Commons:Special:Listusers tells me that you're autopatrolled, but you don't appear to have Filemover. When you don't have that right, you can tag a page with {{rename|Granite Setts.jpg|3|These are granite setts, not cobblestones}} or something to that effect. If you have filemover, you get a "move" tab (just like on en:wp articles) and can move files immediately. See the documentation for Commons:Template:Rename, or ask me, if you have more questions. Nyttend (talk) 02:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you're familiar with making name-change requests, that's good. I wasn't sure if you were familiar with the process at all; that's why I attempted to explain everything. Glad to be helpful. Nyttend (talk) 03:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I need you help I have been cleaning up the article on Jean Kincaid Lady Warriston who is also mentioned in article Mercat Cross, Edinburgh. She was executed at the Girth Cross in Edinburgh.

I have edited the Wikipedia article The Canongate. I would appreciate it if you would look over my edit as it is not clear to me that the source I used that combines the St John's cross with the town cross is correct of if in fact there were originally three crosses at different times. As one of the edit s you made to the Mercat Cross, Edinburgh mentioned that "In 1866 the pieces of the cross from Drum House were reassembled ... (That base now supports the Canongate Cross.)", I am hoping you could lend some help to make sure that the entry in The Canongate#Historic crosses is accurate.

What I want to do is create a redirect to "The Canongate § Historic crosses", but as this site states "girth-cross, a cross marking the boundary of church lands, hence a place of sanctuary" it will be necessary to add a location eg Girth Cross, Edinburgh or Girth Cross, The Canongate or Girth Cross, Holyrood (as this webpage about a cross in Aberdeen demonstrates). What do you think would be the best name to use for the redirect?

-- PBS (talk) 01:39, 14 September 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) 14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've noticed the good work you do on here. I was wondering if you'd be interested in contributing to this ambitious British Isles challenge to bringing about 10,000 improvements to the UK and Ireland. The drive is fuelled by regional contests every few months, but it general an ongoing content improvement development. If you'd be interested in chipping in with the articles you improve please add your name to the participants and start adding your entries to the big list. Diversity of input will make it much more interesting to peruse! Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:29, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kim,

I am emailing to ask permission to use one of your images of the Scottish Parliament House without including the required attribution. The project I am working on is an animated educational series for children, teaching them about issues of citizenship across the United Kingdom.

Though in an ideal world we would be able to suitably credit the use of your image, the way the animations are designed is to introduce the children to an imaginary world they can really immerse themselves in so any unrelated text would spoil this effect.

The alternative option would be to add a credit at the end, but unfortunately as embedded educational content there are no credits, even we don't get one!

The other images we have used have been copyright free with no need for attribution, however we particularly like your image (see link) and feel it suits our purposes perfectly and so it would be fantastic if you would allow us to use it without attribution.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Scottish_Parliament_building,_Holyrood.jpg

Let us know if this is something you could allow us to do, we would be very grateful if so. Please see a link to a similar project we have recently completed to give you an idea of what we are hoping to achieve (and therefore why we cannot attribute).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVJV8iEAm88

If you could let me know at: george@mosaicfilms.com

Many thanks,

82.43.223.182 (talk) 15:25, 18 December 2017 (UTC)George, on behalf of Mosaic Films[reply]

Kim, I've made some small additions/alterations to your excellent article on this. I'm new to Wikipedia editing so please forgive me if I should have contacted you before doing so? Allan Mungall (talk) 16:01, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I see you haven't made any contributions in a few years, but I'm hoping you might get a notification about this and I might be able to tempt you back.

I'm writing an article at the moment about William Dick of Braid. While finding rooting about finding links to add, I came across a number of articles that you had contributed to significantly. If you're interested, it would be great if you would be willing to run your eye over the content before I put it into mainspace - I do a lot of counter-vandalism work, but this will be the first article I've created from scratch, so a bit of help from an old lag would be much appreciated. The draft isn't ready for review yet, but if you are interested, please let me know and I'll tell you when it's ready. (Please ping me if you respond, or drop a note on my talk page - my watchlist is massive due to the counter-vandalism stuff, so I don't see responses unless someone pings me). Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 19:52, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are sure to know about the Edinburgh City Pipe Band, which I stumbled upon today and now I cannot find where that was. Perhaps I am mistaken.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 21:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]