User talk:RFBailey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome to my talk page. Please leave new messages at the bottom. For old discussions, please see the archives.
 Archives |
|
Archive 1: September 2005–June 2006 |
Contents |
[edit] MS King of Scandinavia
Apologies, I'm new to this and didn't know how to create a new paragraph, you wrote: Thank you for your edits to MS King of Scandinavia. However, please note that you shouldn't just copy and paste text from other webpages that are copyrighted. Instead, write it in your own words and cite the source as a reference! Thanks, --RFBailey (talk) 00:39, 27 February 2008
Point taken and I have now learnt a little more. Let me know if my response could have been a little more 'organised'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clin Hoolihan (talk • contribs) 02:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Liverpool edit war
Hi there, thanks for the note on my talk page: I agree with you, looks like a can of worms! I've warned both users for potential violation of WP:3RR since there's just been a spate of reverts this morning...I see the inevitable mop making an appearance soon! ColdmachineTalk 12:04, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WSMR route map
I noticed about half a year ago you did a major revamp of the Wrexham & Shropshire article which removed an image i had uploaded. I was just wondering whhat your opinion is of a new version of this image. Tonight i refined the image quite a lot so it is a lot cleaner and clearer.
Simply south (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. Looking at a map, i have shortened some distances and moved things to try to make it more geographically accurate as well as the improvements in the line thickness and the changes to Wellington, Telford Central and Cosford.
- The two could complement each other i think. Should i try to add a scale to the new map? Simply south (talk) 00:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- I think the scale of the map is either 1:2000000 or 1:1000000 (or similar to these). I need to find a good map. Simply south (talk) 00:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- If to scale, it is going to require a lot more work. Simply south (talk) 00:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- If looking at at it (at a slight angle) on the 1:2000000, the Banbury to Coventry section is pretty accurate so i don't need to change that one that much. Your suggestion of shortening is right as currently Marylebone is near Sheerness and Wolverhampton is in Chester. I've just sen now that Coventry is at the M42/M6 junction. OK, still a lot of work but getting there. Simply south (talk) 01:05, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- In fact i will lengthen some areas and shorten some others. Looking at it now, i was looking at the 1:1000000. And Banbury does have to be moved slightly further north-west. Wolverhampton will stay in roughly the same place, maybe slightly west. Tame Bridge Parkway will be moved sluightly south-west and closer to Wolverhampton. After Wolverhampton, the rest can stay as it is. Only one half has to be lengthened so it is not as bad as i thought. I will add the scale and the N. Simply south (talk) 01:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- No tonight though. Simply south (talk) 02:06, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I have done a furter revamp of the image. It is now to scale (of 1:1000000). Here is the current, updated version (as of 22nd March). Simply south (talk) 18:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- In this newer version, i changed the fobt size from size 10 to size 12. I could possibly increase it to 14 but i don't think any bigger otherwise the text won't fit. Simply south (talk) 19:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Also do you think i should include a scale bar oe leave it as it is? I have mentioned the scale in the summary section on thee image page though. Simply south (talk) 19:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I haven't bothered with the second part and text is now 14. Simply south (talk) 19:30, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
[edit] Help needed
I do seem to be unable to make an informed edit without being challenged by an editor from Manchester, or on this occasion KitchenKnife..I am referring to Falkner Square in Liverpool..I was checking parks and then saw the square was "in Canning, Liverpool" but Canning does not exist as an area...I have even put down a discussion page. However KK wants to challenge me. Even though Canning is not an area just a 'quarter' sometimes referred to as Georgian Quarter..My mind boggles as to why I cannot make a simple amendment without someone being funny with me..What's the point in WP if people who 'run' it are like traffic wardens? What is it you can help me with? I dont know if you are helpful please help! Dmcm2008 (talk) 16:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] LM 170 pic
Reply:
Yes- but I am not uploading an illegal feature film. I am taking a screen-shot of a picture of a 170, which someone has uploaded and released to the world. Nobody can make money out of it - even if they could, the original taker will not mind, as they put the photo on YouTube! I am even stating that it comes from that site- i.e. not by me! Emailing users gets no response- at least it did not when I asked last time! I still can't see what the problem is.
Going back to the subject in hand. If this image is a "copyvio" etc. etc. , then could I suggest that a replacement "free" / "fair use" / "copy free" picture be found somewhere. This is because the current one is ugly, and does not show the livery clearly. It is a shame I do not come across them (re-liveried 170s) - otherwise I would be tempted to take a snapshot.
But, please see - this is good faith, and I have stopped lifting copyrighted images from websites and magazines (the XC images). It is just I can't see what the problem with this image is!
Any advice would be helpful!
Regards, Btline (talk) 23:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] InterCity 250
Thanks for creating a discussion article. It may be that the taskforce does not need to exist. However, I created it to bring to the public eye the train that never was- The InterCity 250. Britishrailclass43 (talk) 21:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Category:Railway stations served by Southeastern
Let me get this straight. A month ago, you created an empty category, which I deleted, fully within process a month later, and now you're upset? There wasn't a note on the category description page explaining that the category could be empty for 30 days (or longer), and all it takes for a category to be kept is one member within it. Surprisingly, I have neither the time nor patience to study your editing habits and patterns before doing maintenance work for the encyclopedia. In the future, simply do not create empty categories. Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Subpage code
Done. Thanks! --Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων (talk) 21:30, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Merge from WestWirralWorks CLC to Hilbre High School
Thanks for sorting this! I confess I'd forgotten about the original merge proposal I'd posted since it was some time ago, and I haven't looked in since. There were no objections though, and it looks a lot tidier now. Thanks for sorting this out. ColdmachineTalk 22:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Talk: Worcester
Between "I could be wrong", "it seems to me", and "I'm sure he'll come back and answer", I thought my good intentions were clear. If you're going to continue seeing me as a manipulator, I'll stay off the page.--Loodog (talk) 01:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] First Harrogate Trains Reference
I had the same problem with the reference on this page. Can't understand why it doesn't work. --Fuelboy (talk) 07:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Swansea
Yes it is a BRT system but not a metro system. In fact the opening line of the metro article states that because there is no grade separation with other road transport. Welshleprechaun (talk) 18:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
