Archives

User talk:Tafkam/Archive 1 (31 Jan 2008) User talk:Tafkam/Archive 2 (31 Dec 2009)

• Hi, I've just come across the above, it's obviously written in good faith by, it appears, an ex pupil. I've added some info on the school to Plumpton but I'm not at all sure that it's notable enough for its own article. What do you think? Regards Paste ^Talk 15:46, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've uploaded File:Desmondandersonlogo.png, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:35, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi, I wonder if you could help, I've been having a look at the above and I have added Varndean College and moved The Dharma School both seem fine on the template but do not seem to work on their own pages, if you see what I mean. Could you have a look and see what I have done wrong, if anything? Many thanks. Paste ^Talk 15:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the reply, however what I meant was that the template seems fine as you say, but let's look at The Dharma School - I moved it in the template to independent preps as it is an independent school. Fine so far but if you go to the The Dharma School article the template there is still showing it in state primaries! Paste ^Talk 18:53, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm just wondering why you removed the info I added to Three-tier education with an edit summary saying that it's erroneous? I think I may have been mistaken to say 'includes' on the LEAs which are all three-tier but numerous counties do have partial three-tier systems, including Suffolk and Warks. Dancarney (talk) 09:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tafkam; thanks for your note and the map link. I was rather confused by the whole thing when I wrote it originally in the listed buildings article, and in fact as you say I did have it the wrong way round. I had been searching online for an old map, trying to confirm where CP was in relation to the boundary, without success, so in the end the text got mixed up! Comparing the position and the boundary on your map with the current boundary and equivalent position on the modern map, it was clearly moved from Surrey to West Sussex. Thanks also for adding the scan of the 1932 OS map to Crawley; not only is it useful there, but it proved helpful in the Lowfield Heath article. Anyway, look out for more Crawley building articles ... The George might be next, but needs lots of research! Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 23:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Forestboyslogo.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 00:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for your note and barnstar (I've fiddled around with the code); and particular thanks for uploading the pic of the church at Bewbush. I went on a marathon trip round town yesterday, trying to get as many photos as possible before moving the article from my sandbox; I managed about 22 or something (think I visited about 10 neighbourhoods in 5 hours, all on foot/by bus) but got completely lost in Bewbush ... once I got beyond Dorsten Square I couldn't see any road names or anything. I think all extant places of worship are covered in the list; let me know if you think of any more in the Borough area. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 11:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A good point about Gatwick: definitely needs to be included for comprehensiveness, being part of the borough, so I've added a section at the end. They don't really fit into the main list as they are a special case, and anyway the photos would just show a room and a door (plus it might be a bit risky taking pix in airports in these security-conscious times!). Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:51, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I've nearly finished an article on the hospital (currently in a sandbox), but I'm having awful trouble finding a figure for the current number of beds. I found 143 in some official-looking online document somewhere, but that doesn't seem right ... I would have thought there are more than that. (Perhaps that refers to a certain type of bed?) I'm going to the library tomorrow for something else, so I'll try to find out something there, but do you happen to know where I might look for such info? There's surprisingly little on the internet about it! Also, I'm temporarily suffering from historic building fatigue, so my next Crawley-related actions will be improving the neighbourhood articles. Most, except Bewbush which you did a big update of about a year ago, are in dismal condition. (The articles, that is!) Look out for updates any time soon; I'll probably go at them one by one rather than attacking all of them at once. As with the main Crawley article, there may be some bits you can add to on topics I'm less familiar with. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm ~ some surprising info there about the hospital! Thanks for the links. I have moved the article to mainspace today. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 23:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - thanks for uploading the original logo for this article. I have uploaded a new version on request of review staff since there is a new official logo available. I also re-sized the thumbnail in the article so that the new text is readable. I hope these edits are alright with you and feel free to further tweak the size and so on. Best wishes, T. J. Day (talk) 12:26, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Middle school teacher! That explains it. I nearly ended up at one such myself but it wasn't to be. Anyway, I wasn't trying to promote the old 'form' nomenclature but including it because in my experience many parents still refer back to the old style. Maybe a list allowing them to become familiar with the new 'Years' would help them adjust?

Ewen (talk) 20:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MichaelT1979! An article you have been involved with urgently needs expanding (references required) to avoid becoming a candidate for a deletion proposal (PROD.) If you can help with these issues please see Talk:Pershore, improve the article if you can, and leave any comments there.--Kudpung (talk) 03:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tafkam, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to St. Felix CEVC Middle School has been removed. It was removed by 82.16.110.215 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with 82.16.110.215 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 22:11, 1 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)[reply]

I'm a liar. I knew it was not quite right.

Crawley was proposed as the first new town, but had a cholerapolio outbreak and so they made it Stevenage (where I grew up). My mistake entirely.

I have not changed the article because I see from your talk that you know more about Crawley than I do. It should be changed but wanted to reply to you first. It is a complete cock-up on my part, I do have references but would be hard pressed to find the best. Any suggestions welcome. David Kynaston Austerity Britain? SimonTrew (talk) 10:39, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We are not going to reconcile this until I can find RS. Having essentially been born in Stevenage and grew up there (I was acually born in Welwyn Garden City as there was no maternity ward at the new Lister Hospital in stevenage in 1972) you can imagine we were kinda taught a lot about this. I am still churning away trying to think where I would find this. Even if you are right and I am wrong, it would be good to find it if only to refute it. No doubt lots of tedious checks could find it through Hansard or something but that would be a hell of a lot of work to trace and, as you suggest (I think), may still not be accurate because the actual rubber stamp date might differ from when the announcements etc. SimonTrew (talk) 11:03, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kynaston says p159 "In order of designation, Stevenage, Crawley, Hemel Hempstead, harlow, Hatfield, Welwyn, Basildon and Bracknel.. (About the ones from from the warime Country of London Plan). I would still love to find the reference that made me think the other: That is what I was told as a child. SimonTrew (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kynaston, David (2007). Austerity Britain (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury. p. 159. ISBN 978-0-7475-5985-4. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: checksum (help)

Hello, MichaelT1979. You have new messages at SimonTrew's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I think Crawley was designated first but am racking my brains for an RS here. SimonTrew (talk) 11:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} I have placed a warning on the talk page of User:Pitcroft following several edits of pages removing the reference request tags. The user has again logged in and repeated the actions (as shown on his edit history). I'm not sure whether a higher level warning should be issued, or a block requested. Can someone advise - or better still, deal with the next stage to advise/stop this user? Thanks Tafkam (talk) 17:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tafkam, after checking the contributions made by User:Pitcroft, it seems that ALL his contributions are removing those tags(with pretty much the same edit summaries), while the articles involved are lacking appropiate citations indeed. However, although he ignores the warning placed on his page, please beware that he might be a newcomer (His first contribution was on Aug 24) and simply doesn't know about user talk pages, as he is lacking a User page. Nevertheless, I tried to Email him but failed due to the lack of an Email address specified by him. So, unfortunately, you might wanna check out WP:AIV. Hope this helps :) Blodance (talk) 17:53, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tafkam! Remember the Crawley overhaul? I now feel like doing something similar for the town where I work. See here for proposed structure. I plan to write a separate History of Worthing article as well. This will be a long-term thing; any advice or assistance welcome. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:31, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "I have suggested splitting out the History section from this over-long and unwieldy article. The Worthing article is incomplete and is already over 100kb. The article itself needs considerable work to bring it up to an acceptable standard, but the history section seems to be the best set-out and best-referenced part of it. Accordingly, it seems timely to separate that into an article in its own write, if only in the hope that a shorter Worthing article might encourage more to make edits to bring it up to standard". I have turned the history into a separate article in the hope that this will make Worthing easier to work with.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 15:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:48, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:28, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:07, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of middle schools in England, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Merton and Harrow (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) 13:00, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you make a second version of this diagram, showing two catchpoints, one at the departure end of each loop?

So that it can be used for Albion Park railway station the up loop should be drawn completely straight. The catchpoints are about 50m from the end of the loop. The platform(s) here are 200m long while the double line section is 400m long, so a freight train about 350m can be crossed.

Albion Park has two side platforms rather than an island platform.

Keep the old version. Tabletop (talk) 02:45, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someone showed me how to use "archivebox". Tabletop (talk) 03:21, 4 October 2013 (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) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MichaelT1979. 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]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MichaelT1979. 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]

Hi, I'm Boleyn. MichaelT1979, thanks for creating Education Act 1964!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. PLease add your sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 13:16, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification re Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Curriculum (England and Wales) (2nd nomination). Algarve1233 (talk) 17:36, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MichaelT1979. 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]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:54, 16 March 2020 (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) 01:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:00, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]