Jump to content

User talk:Mattbuck/Archive7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Mattbuck

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by JPxG (talk | contribs) at 00:43, 2 August 2023 (Repair several decades-old busted links (via WP:JWB)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


The Signpost: 02 October 2013

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Stapleton Road railway station may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"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:
  • }</ref> However, the Severn Beach Line and the line [[Bristol to Exeter Line|to Weston-super-Mare]]] will not be electrified, so services at Stapleton Road will still be provided by diesel trains.<

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Stapleton Road railway station may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:
  • higher, bridge angered local residents who felt it infringed on their privacy.<ref name="bridge">{{cite news|url=http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Family-s-garden-privacy-wrecked-bridge/story-18541183-
  • 28 March 2013|accessdate=10 October 2013|work=[[The Bristol Post]]|publisher=[[Northcliffe Media]]}]</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:54, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 October 2013

The Signpost: 16 October 2013

The Signpost: 23 October 2013

First Great Western franchise information

I accept that the franchise agreements for FGW will not likely directly impact the station fabric, but it does not seem illogical that articles which include information on who runs trains from a station will contain information about who will run trains in future. Especially since all the articles make extensive reference to the companies which operated there before. The paragraph explaining the situation is not especially long, and I hardly think it's a problem, especially given that at least five of the articles you edited are listed as "good article"s. I have reverted your changes, and urge you to discuss this at WT:UKRAIL if you disagree. -mattbuck (Talk) 06:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

If we must have, then at least it should be correct, have amended at Bristol Temple Meads will leave you to fix the rest. Just because an article is flagged as a "good article", doesn't mean further work isn't required. BTM has plenty of red wikilinks for example.Ibsiadkgneoeb (talk) 00:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Let's take it to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_Railways#FGW_Franchise_wording. I will not change it back until it has been discussed there, I suggest you do not change any more articles either. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:37, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bristol Parkway railway station

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bristol Parkway railway station you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bhtpbank -- Bhtpbank (talk) 09:20, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 October 2013

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Filton Abbey Wood railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kingswood (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) 09:20, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014

Hi, if you haven't already, you should consider signing up for WikiCup 2014. Cheers, --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 01:26, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks but no thanks, I don't edit that much here. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:55, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 November 2013

Thanks much

Thanks for your helpful contribution at Beck v. Eiland-Hall.

Perhaps you may wish to comment at the Peer Review, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Beck v. Eiland-Hall/archive1.

Hope you're doing well,

— Cirt (talk) 19:06, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

No thanks, it's just been on my watchlist for a while and I happened to reread it and noticed the most important bit of information was missing. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:06, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Okay no prob, thanks again for your interest. It's a most fascinating case with interesting implications for freedom of speech. Have a great day, — Cirt (talk) 20:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject Freedom of speech

There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:

  1. List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants.
  2. Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
  3. Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}.
  4. Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
  5. Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.

Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 19:11, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Ndashes in reference names

Sorry about that. Brain on half power, I guess. Mr Stephen (talk) 23:25, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 November 2013

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to British Rail Class 144 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:
  • A [[Northern Rail]] class 144 unit caught fire near {{rws|Rochdale}} on 21 November 2013.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-25042831|title=Manchester to Leeds
  • [[British Broadcasting Corporation|BBC]]|date=21 November 2013|accessdate=22 November 2013}]</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:45, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Class 221

Matt, you have been around a long time and I am really surprised you are pushing back on this. "Publisher" in "cite news" is used only in the case of obscure sources, e.g. long-defunct local newspapers, whose identity might otherwise be in doubt. In particular, we never say that BBC News is published by the BBC because it is so obviously redundant. Surely you must be aware that a parameter in a template does not necessarily have to be filled in just because it is there. The rule is: leave it blank if it serves no useful purpose in this particular instance. -- Alarics (talk) 23:11, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 November 2013

Request for comment

A request for comment has been started on an issue you have been discussing at Talk:Doctor_Who#Tables.Blethering Scot 21:29, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Note left at WP:GAN has been reverted by User:Legobot

The note that you left at WP:GAN has been reverted by User:Legobot. The bot cleans up stray text left on the page. You must either leave a note in the note section of the {{GA nominee}} template on the article's talk page or leave a note at WT:GAN.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:09, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Bristol Parkway railway station

Firstly, I never gave a review of the article, so I have wasted anyone's time. I never said that I would do the review, but I gave my opinion, which I standby, that the article needed time for people to see and review pending a GA review. That was perfectly reasonable, considering that it had been heavily edited over the previous month.

Secondly, I think you need to read WP:OWN and leave your ego at the door when you edit on Wikipedia. Having seen your rant on my talk page, I conclude that you just want someone to "rubber stamp" this article as being GA so that you can add it to the list of your Wikipedia accomplishments. It's all about you.

I note that you have other articles awaiting GA review (more notches on your Wikipedia bedpost?). If you show other editors the same respect that you have shown me, then don't expect to see any of them achieve GA status anytime soon Bhtpbank (talk) 18:18, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps we should avoid contact with each other in future. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:13, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Perfect solution

I think my last edit on Template:Filton railway station services (first) and Template:Filton railway station services (second) is the perfect solution for the problem. Instead of adding the page to either Category:Pages with missing references list or Category:Pages with broken reference names, it avoids both. Debresser (talk) 23:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Not bad. References in templates are annoyingly necessary sometimes. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:41, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your fix, by the way. Debresser (talk) 00:56, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Nipple stimulation article

You seem to be all too much interested in keeping your porn in this article (a reason why I stopped assuming good faith on your part long ago). Let me remind you why your image should be deleted: "Not censored does not give special favor to offensive content[...]Material that could be considered vulgar, obscene or offensive should not be included unless it is treated in an encyclopedic manner. Offensive material should be used only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available." Your image doesn't abide to any of these rules: it's not informative, it's not relevant, it's not representative of the vast majority of the population, and above all, it's neither the best nor the least offensive of the options. There are other images both better and less offensive to illustrate the article. But your refusal to acknowledge this is turning rather suspicious. As I already said, keep your fetishes for yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.22.48.82 (talk) 14:38, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Because clearly a painting is more useful than an anatomical drawing. We can crop out the bottom if that bit offends you. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:00, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 December 2013

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

The Signpost: 18 December 2013

Confusing Heron Quays and Canary Wharf

Hey, I found a number of your images on commons seem to confuse Heron Quays for Canary Wharf. Please see here. Simply south...... eating lexicological sandwiches for just 7 years 23:39, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

No, they were just taken from Canary Wharf DLR station. My naming scheme is consistent. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:00, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Even so, the names of the files are confusing. e.g. File:Canary Wharf DLR station MMB 07 26.jpg, File:Canary Wharf DLR station MMB 08.jpg, File:Canary Wharf DLR station MMB 06.jpg and even for a different one File:West India Quay DLR station MMB 01.jpg. I'm sure that when people look for images of stations they expect to see images of those stations, not images of other stations. The names may be consistent but they are confusing and need to be renamed e.g. Heron Quays from Canary Wharf MMB 01? The name of the image is important, not just the description. Simply south...... eating lexicological sandwiches for just 7 years 01:02, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Well, all up to the first number is a filing system based on where the image is taken. Anything after that is just added descriptors. How about eg Canary Wharf DLR station MMB 08 Heon Quays DLR station.jpg. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:36, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Stapleton Road railway station

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Stapleton Road railway station you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LT910001 -- LT910001 (talk) 01:41, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 December 2013

Your GA nomination of Bristol Parkway railway station

The article Bristol Parkway railway station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bristol Parkway railway station for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LT910001 -- LT910001 (talk) 00:22, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Stapleton Road railway station

The article Stapleton Road railway station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Stapleton Road railway station for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LT910001 -- LT910001 (talk) 02:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lawrence Hill railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black spot (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) 09:04, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 January 2014

The Signpost: 08 January 2014

Chalkwell railway station

Do we need the image size atrbute? Isnt it usual to let it default? Chevin (talk) 18:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't sure if no size would make it 100%. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:31, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I believe with images in infoboxes and with thumbails it is usual not to specify image size. That way the wiki software can adjustto suit different users monitors and graphic systems. 07:49, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

ANI discussion

I can understand if you'd rather just let the matter be, but there's a discussion on the Administrators' Noticeboard (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Bhtpbank: Unfounded accusations, abuse, foul language and threats) about Bhtpbank and I know that you were also on the receiving end of one of his GA "reviews". Your perspective might be helpful. Best, Mackensen (talk) 16:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention, but I don't feel my point of view is particularly relevant here. He said he'd review it, he never did, that's really all I can contribute. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:00, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 January 2014

Your GA nomination of Filton Abbey Wood railway station

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Filton Abbey Wood railway station you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Coemgenus -- Coemgenus (talk) 17:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Filton Abbey Wood railway station

The article Filton Abbey Wood railway station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Filton Abbey Wood railway station for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Coemgenus -- Coemgenus (talk) 00:02, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lawrence Hill railway station

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lawrence Hill railway station you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 06:21, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Worle railway station

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Worle railway station you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 06:21, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Worle railway station

The article Worle railway station you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Worle railway station for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 01:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lawrence Hill railway station

The article Lawrence Hill railway station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lawrence Hill railway station for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 04:12, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 January 2014

Your GA nomination of Worle railway station

The article Worle railway station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Worle railway station for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 22:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

Nottingham

No it's needed at the right spelling of South but it wouldn't let me for technical reasons. I want all constituency pages to have that disambiguation in brackets, JHunterJ is causing disruption by removing it. doktorb wordsdeeds 19:39, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

The Signpost: 12 February 2014

The Signpost: 19 February 2014

The Signpost: 26 February 2014

Bakerloo 2020 vision

Re [1], my first Google hit was:

  • 2020 Vision, The Greatest City on Earth, Ambitions for London by Boris Johnson (PDF). Greater London Authority. June 2013. pp. 17, 32. ISBN 978 1 84781 551 4. open up outer London town centre hubs by extending the Bakerloo line beyond Elephant and Castle … And after years of talking about it, we now have the tunnelling technology to extend the Tube into the soft clay of south London. We are now looking at the extension of the Bakerloo line beyond Elephant and Castle.

—Sladen (talk) 14:54, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Guess the London.gov search engine is rubbish... Either way, it still has no actual details, just "beyond E&C". Any extension in the south matches that criteria. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:08, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

(test) The Signpost: 05 March 2014

The Signpost: 12 March 2014

Travelcards

Hi, re this revert: I too would have reverted as unsourced, but your claim 'no such thing as a ldn-pbo "travelcard"' is not quite true. Although the Travelcard boundary stations are Hadley Wood and Crews Hill, you can buy tickets from Retford or any station south of there (including Peterborough) which are marked " Day Travelcard"; "OFF-PEAK TCD"; "Between PETERBOROUGH & LONDON ZONES 1-6". The price is slightly less than it would cost to buy an off-peak day return to King's Cross and a separate six-zone Travelcard. See for example this page where in the blue box headed "Train times & tickets" there is a button "with Travelcard From £34.00". --Redrose64 (talk) 16:23, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2014

The Signpost: 26 March 2014

Edit summaries

Hello Mattbuck; thank you for the recent edit at Electric Spine. I notice a lot of your edits (this one included) don't have an edit summary. This means that other editors need to fully click to view the diff for context, rather than simply being able to skim the types of edits appearing on a watchlist. If you find yourself sometimes forgetting, there is a setting in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing ("Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary") which can be useful in some circumstances. Hope that helps, —Sladen (talk) 12:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't find myself forgetting, I find myself not wanting to. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:04, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
I appreciate that it maybe a conscious positive decision. Choosing not to add edit summaries to document the changes being made has a detrimental impact on the working on other editors. Is there anything I can do to help it easier to fill in the summary line? For example in the edit I first spotted, perhaps just "use {{rws|…}}" would have been clear and given context. —Sladen (talk) 13:13, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2014

The Signpost: 09 April 2014

The Signpost: 23 April 2014

The Signpost: 30 April 2014

The Signpost: 07 May 2014

The Signpost: 14 May 2014

The Signpost: 21 May 2014

The Signpost: 28 May 2014

The Signpost: 04 June 2014

The Signpost: 11 June 2014

The Signpost: 18 June 2014

The Signpost: 25 June 2014

The Signpost: 02 July 2014


You have been nominated for a gift from the Wikimedia Foundation!

You have been selected to receive a merchandise giveaway. Click the following link for more details: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways/Nominations. Please send me an email (jmatthews@wikimedia.org) for instructions on how to claim your shirt. Thank you again for all you do! --JMatthews (WMF) (talk) 05:16, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2014

The Signpost: 16 July 2014

The Signpost: 23 July 2014

The Signpost: 30 July 2014

Worcester Shrub Hill

See http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/SME/html/NRE_WOS/plan.html - has one of these three platforms had the track lifted? --Redrose64 (talk) 14:21, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Huh, I thought there was a wall all along that side. My bad. But I didn't see any signs to a platform 3, and that "platform" is at best two carriages long. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:14, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
The "Trackmaps" for the Western Region shows Platform 3 as 3 coaches long. I've checked the working timetable, and Book PB05 (Oxford-Worcester SH) shows no services using platform 3. Book PB02 (Barnt Green-Bristol PW) shows a few services starting at Worcester SH for which the "timing load" is a Class 150, which would be short enough; unfortunately, that WTT book doesn't give the platform at Worcester. These are the 06:49 SX/06:47 SO (2O70) Worcester SH to Weymouth; 09:08 SO (2F97) Worcester SH to Westbury; and the 22:28 SX (2G99) Worcester SH to Gloucester. There are several more on Sundays. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:45, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2014

The Signpost: 13 August 2014

The Signpost: 20 August 2014

The Signpost: 27 August 2014

The Signpost: 03 September 2014

The Signpost: 10 September 2014

The Signpost: 17 September 2014

The Signpost: 24 September 2014

The Signpost: 01 October 2014

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:JML poster McFly.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:JML poster McFly.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 09:01, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Rugby railway station

I reverted your reversion. I think you have misunderstood the template(accepting that the template is not documented!). Row 1 is the TOC, row 2 is the service and row 3 is the line/route. I corrected row 3. I suppose we could say 'WCML via Northampton' if you prefer? But Row 2 still says London - Birmingham. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:51, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

I see what you mean, I shall make a change. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:02, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure that the way you have done it quite hits the spot. There are indeed two routes from Euston to BNS - one via Northampton and one direct. But (a) the LM service doesn't use the direct route and (b) in any case the two routes that you have added are in sequence, not in parallel (which is what I think is the intention of the route1/route2 syntax). How about this:
Preceding station National Rail National Rail Following station
Nuneaton   London Midland
London–Crewe 		  Milton Keynes Central
(Long Buckby on Sundays)
Coventry   London Midland
London - Rugby via Northampton, Rugby - Birmingham 		  Long Buckby
Coventry   London Midland
London-Birmingham 		  Milton Keynes Central
or indeed just this
Preceding station National Rail National Rail Following station
Nuneaton   London Midland
London–Crewe 		  Milton Keynes Central
(Long Buckby on Sundays)
Coventry   London Midland
WCML via Northampton 		  Long Buckby
Coventry   London Midland
London-Birmingham 		  Milton Keynes Central
which I prefer.
(We ought to wlink London-Crewe as well, but lets sort out Northampton first). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:27, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by "in sequence" - either the two services take the same path or they don't. The way I do routeboxes is that the first line is the TOC, then the 2nd line is the service, wikilinked to the line, and things are grouped together where possible. I would suggest merging the two, but as we state one is "via Northampton" it makes the "from Northampton" seem a bit superfluous. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Preceding station National Rail National Rail Following station
Nuneaton   London Midland
London – Crewe 		  Milton Keynes Central
(Not Sundays)
    Long Buckby
(Sundays only)
Coventry   London Midland
London - Birmingham 		  Milton Keynes Central
  London Midland
London - Birmingham via Northampton 		  Long Buckby
  London Midland
Northampton - Birmingham 		 
By 'in sequence', I meant the route goes eus-ntn-rug then rug-cov-bns - not either/or (which is the purpose of the 'route1'/'route2' syntax). There are two WCML routes between MKC and RUG, one direct and one via Northampton. LM services BNS-EUS only use the Northampton route: the table needs to specify this. The way you have done the table implies that the service can take either of these routes - but it doesn't so we should not show two routes. We only need 'WCML via Northampton' (or 'London - Birmingham via Northampton' if you prefer.
(Beyond Rugby, the WCML splits again but there is no need to specify since there is no ambiguity - BNS is the terminus so this is the branch taken. That's the reason for my preference for the simple version. BTW, I agree with the way you've done the Sunday service). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:54, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
I see now that you have munged 'service name' and 'line name', which is part of the confusion. The table should show TOC then Route then Service . The 'service' is simply London-Birmingham and has no wlink. The 'route' is "WCML via Northampton". --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
What exactly are we arguing over again? From what I understand, we agree about London-Crewe. Beyond that we have three services to consider: London to Birmingham direct; London to Birmingham via Northampton and finally Northampton - Birmingham. If you are saying there is no LM service EUS-NTH-BHM then we can just remove that row entirely as it's irrelevant and also ignore "via Northampton" because the next station is Long Buckby. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:22, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
I think that Sunday services are normally omitted from the routeboxes. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:13, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
No, there is no EUS-BHM service that bypasses NTN. [Sorry, I see that I copied something of yours above without looking at it and introduced this service that doesn't exist). This is all we need, remembering that the route box is only intended as a quick overview. If there are complicated details, let's leave it to the text to describe.
Preceding station National Rail National Rail Following station
Nuneaton   London Midland
West Coast Main Line
London - Crewe 		  Milton Keynes Central
Coventry   London Midland
WCML via Northampton
London - Birmingham 		  Long Buckby
User:Redrose64, thanks, that's good news. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:38, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
But there is still a Northampton to Birmingham service (I think I've been on that one), which needs to be included. Regarding the line details, I think we need a wider discussion on quite what it's meant to be, but based on the way things are generally laid out I propose this: -mattbuck (Talk) 09:26, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Preceding station National Rail National Rail Following station
Nuneaton   London Midland
London – Crewe 		  Milton Keynes Central
Coventry   London Midland
London - Birmingham 		  Long Buckby
  London Midland
Northampton - Birmingham 		 
Yes, I agree, I can see that. LM treat NTN as the outer limit of both the London and Birmingham commuter belts - at odd times I've had to change at NTP to continue south and even the eus-bhm service often seems to wait there (for a change of driver and guard?). So let's close the discussion with that version - your cue. I've just changed Northampton to match.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 October 2014

main page images

I just looked at main page images [2] and saw a big red "File not protected as intended". The discussion at @Jimbo Wales: talk page about uploading "updates" with inappropriate images seems like a possibility on the main page but I am not admin on either site nor familiar enough with image protection to know. Can you have a look to make sure this is not the case? This is scary [3] if it does what I think it will do. --DHeyward (talk) 17:01, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

I have protected it for a week. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:07, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
That was just an example. Every image on the main page appears open (except the one you locked). The bot broke or something. --DHeyward (talk) 23:58, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
@DHeyward: There is more on this matter at WP:BOTREQ#Main page image vandalism - adminbot request. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:09, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 October 2014

The Signpost: 22 October 2014

The Signpost: 29 October 2014

The Signpost: 05 November 2014

Your GA nomination of Sea Mills railway station

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sea Mills railway station you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 10:41, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sea Mills railway station

The article Sea Mills railway station you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Sea Mills railway station for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 18:41, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 November 2014

Your GA nomination of Sea Mills railway station

The article Sea Mills railway station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sea Mills railway station for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 16:24, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Alejandro image

Hey Matt, was wondering whether I can have your input regarding the above article's image placement. Could you please come to my or the article's talk page? —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 06:07, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 November 2014

it broke everything on this page

Hi, before making this revert, did you try a WP:PURGE? The page had not been edited since I made this revert, and I suspect that the edits that I reverted were the cause. If prior to your edit, parts of the page looked like this, that confirms my suspicion. The effects of the bad edit certainly persisted for some time after my revert, see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 132#Template help needed. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:09, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

I did not. I have reverted my revert. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:07, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 December 2014

The Signpost: 10 December 2014

The Signpost: 17 December 2014

The Signpost: 24 December 2014

The Signpost: 31 December 2014

The Signpost: 07 January 2015

The Signpost: 14 January 2015

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

Orphaned non-free image File:Hitachi SET exterior.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hitachi SET exterior.jpg. 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. Nick (talk) 01:04, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

P.S - Hitachi Rail Europe's press office has released all of their images under CC-BY-3.0 so I'm uploading those to Commons at the moment. See commons:Category:Photographs by Hitachi Rail Europe. Nick (talk) 01:04, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2015

The Signpost: 04 February 2015

Reversion of edit to Class 395s

Hi, thanks for your contribution to The Southeastern article regarding Class 395 stock.

However, I am aware that some rail media do erroneously refer to the 395 as a Javelin. This confusion has surrounded the stock ever since the early days, and results from journalists getting confused between the new stock and the service they were to run during the Olympic period (which was announced simultaneously). On the 395 page it is noted that the class is often referred to informally as Javelins by some people. However, for an encylcopedia we should be using the correct and accurate name, not the nickname.

I'm a rolling stock engineer at Southeastern, and familiar with the 395 stock. I can assure you that neither Southeastern nor Hitachi ever refer to the 395 as a Javelin in official sources, it is purely a nickname given by the media. It's worth mentioning in the main article for the class (which it is) but isn't the recognised name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2p0rk (talk • contribs) 08:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2015

The Signpost: 18 February 2015

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

The Signpost: 04 March 2015

The Signpost: 11 March 2015

The Signpost: 18 March 2015

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:34, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

.

The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:25, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Latin Kings. 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) 09:02, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost, 1 April 2015

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mattbuck/Archive7&oldid=1168304575"