User talk:Redrose64

Hello, Redrose64! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can 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 clicking Button sig.png or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! --Jza84 |  Talk  13:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do

Keepitreal42 and Michael Jackson 4 [ edit ]

I believe that Keepitreal42 and Michael Jackson 4 are the same editor, see my comment at User talk:Keepitreal42#Possible sock. Should they be blocked for vandalism-only accounts as well as abuse of multiple accounts? C2A06 (AboutTalkEdits) 07:30, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I'm certain of it. But with this post and now this one, you have showed your hand too early, now they know we're on to them. I was hoping that they would exhibit a few more instances of similar behaviour, as with Jubilee line. I also don't think you should have asked for their user pages to be speedied. Really, you should have gathered your evidence and used it to file a WP:SPI (using Keepitreal42 as sockmaster, since they both registered and edited first), listing not just those two but also the various IP addresses that have had similar behaviour. In that SPI you can present all of the evidence together. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:20, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
I have filed an SPI case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Keepitreal42. C2A06 (AboutTalkEdits) 11:22, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't see any diffs, other than of posts to their user talk page which won't stand up in court. You need diffs of similar and problematic behaviour elsewhere, preferably in mainspace. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:04, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Help please [ edit ]

Hello R. All sorts of admin dashboards are in the Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. I thought I had taken care of it when I found the template on an admin noticeboard that didn't need it but that was yesterday and they are all still there. This is the first time I've been unable to locate the problem since you gave me the code to have the transclusions display in chrono order so I am hoping that it is something that will be easy for you to find. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 16:51, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Fixed, I'm pretty sure, with this edit. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:41, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
That has taken care of things Jonesey95. Much appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 18:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

WP:CIR? [ edit ]

FYI in case you hadn't noticed their edits after the first block. I'm not a subject matter expert on London transport, but had noticed that at least some of their edits were flat out incorrect. OhNoitsJamieTalk 23:07, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

See two sections above. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:11, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Ah, thanks! OhNoitsJamieTalk 23:12, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Fixing RfC that was never listed [ edit ]

I believe you do some work on cleaning up RfCs. Is this the correct way to fix an RfC that was never listed? Thanks. —DIYeditor (talk) 17:19, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@DIYeditor: It was listed, see this edit and this one. It was delisted after the standard thirty days, see this edit and this one. Why do you think that it was never listed? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:00, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Oh, my mistake. I didn't see the template there or any close so I assumed it hadn't been listed. Thanks for looking at it. Is reverting my edit adequate to delist the RFC now? —DIYeditor (talk) 21:42, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:23, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

45699 Article [ edit ]

Looking through the article the photographs are out of date. From researching photographs over wiki the only photographs of Galatea in it's present form which is BR green and dressed up as Alberta are those from a user has been put down as blocked. The article needs a massive refresh with new photographs and more recent information including into the article as the present photographs are over 5 years out of date showing an engine which doesnt look like what it now is and could end up confusing people. These photographs of the blocked user are at present are the only ones which could be ideal for the article until other new images from other users can be uploaded to the article which are of the engine in BR green.(talk) 23:45, 25 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:FC98:DB00:6DA8:719F:B2B9:CD51 (talk)

You don't say which article - as it says in the box at the top, if you wish to draw my attention to an article, it's always best to link it. Besides which, you should express your concerns at the article's talk page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:53, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
This is the article in question The photographs in question for this article are over 5 years out of date and the information hasnt been updated either aside from saying what its dressed as now but there is no photographic proof in the article apart from some photos by a blocked user. These shots of which are the only photographic proof there is of the engine dressed as 45562 Alberta at present. For the talk article then if it needs bringing up there could you provide a link.(talk) 00:10, 26 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:FC98:DB00:6DA8:719F:B2B9:CD51 (talk)
WP:Link is clearly not the article. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:20, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
The article link is for 45699 Galatea. It needs a complete refresh with recent information including links to prove that it's dressed as Alberta or images confirming the information is genuine.(talk) 00:32, 26 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:FC98:DB00:6DA8:719F:B2B9:CD51 (talk)

Template:WikiProject Anime and manga conversion [ edit ]

Hello Redrose64, I wanted to ping you about the status of the WP:ANIME WPBannerMeta conversion (at Template talk:WikiProject Anime and manga § Comments related to WPBannerMeta conversion). User:WOSlinker gave the sandbox version the go-ahead about a week-and-a-half ago; could you give it a look over yourself and merge it with the main template if ready? — Goszei (talk) 00:13, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

There's been so much activity at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Lead sections for Latin titles that I kinda tuned out from that page. Will look at it soon, but maybe not until Tuesday. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:21, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind help [ edit ]

Thank you for your kind help on how to get a template saying "This article of interest to..." on the talk page of Wikipedia: WikiProject Mysticism. I have been editing Wikipedia for many years, but I am still learning about it! I shall trying to get consensus from the members of the WikiProject to see whether they are happy for the template to go on the talk pages of selected articles. Vorbee (talk) 07:55, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you from me as well. You helped fix an RFC on the baps pageApplebutter221 (talk) 01:12, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

A cookie for you! [ edit ]

Choco chip cookie.png Much thanks for willing to help me with that tricky SVG image. Mike like0708 (talk) 15:42, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Face-smile.svgThank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:01, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Nir Eyal [ edit ]

Bioethicist Dr. Nir Eyal works and lives in New Jersey at this time (although he was in Massachusetts before, as the article states). You had removed mention of NJ. MaynardClark (talk) 03:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

@MaynardClark: What is this about? If you wish to draw my attention to an article (or other page), it's always best to link it. Use diffs if you wish to discuss a particular edit. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:22, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Congleton station [ edit ]

Hi so I have noticed that a while back on the page for Congleton station in the current services section you changed “Stoke-on-Trent” back to “stoke on trent”.

I wish to ask you wether it could be possible if a standard way of spelling for the railway station of stoke on trent could be agreed upon for the page for Congleton station, as on most of the page the spelling “stoke-on- trent” is used but that one sentence in current services is different.

I just wish to notify you of this issue and ask if we can reach an agreement on solving this matter.

Many Thanks. Maurice Oly (talk) 23:15, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Diff please. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:28, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

State leaders by age [ edit ]

How about continuing our discussion in Talk: Lists of state leaders by age. It seems to me that we have not reached a consensus. 'Doomer1557' ( talk) 12:15, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Ivatt [ edit ]

There's only one person known as Henry Ivatt: Henry Ivatt. His son Henry George Ivatt is known as George Ivatt. Sometimes referenced as H. A Ivatt and H. G Ivatt respectively. At least, that's according to the books I have, though the Ivatts, père et fils, figure less in my collection than Sir Nigel. Guy (help!) 13:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Whenever [ edit ]

you want it. © Tbhotch (en-3). 21:35, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

What is this about? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:44, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

DRV [ edit ]

Please can you and Thryduulf let me know if you plan to make a DRV regarding the stations infoboxes, so I know whether to pause my work on the merge for now? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:07, 4 August 2020 (UTC)


Sorry, I'm new to submitting on Wikipedia. I don't understand what your comments on my submission means: "no such template - these are the best fits - please WP:PREVIEW your edits". — Preceding unsigned comment added by CHEOS CTN (talkcontribs) 20:46, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@CHEOS CTN: I have never edited that page: see the page history. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Help:Notifications [ edit ]

I've finished up the bulk of the edits. Feel free to take a look and give feedback, or just rollback wholesale :) Wug·a·po·des 22:44, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

There are a lot of changes, and I mean a lot. Have you fixed the inward links to sections? Help:Notifications#Triggering events also Help:Notifications#Alerts both now go to the top of the page, but I am certain that these links exist other than on this page, because I've used them myself when explaining to people that edits like this won't work. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:02, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Good catch. I added those two where I think they fit best, and went through the old version and restored all the anchors and also added relevant section titles as anchors. Are there ways to check for incoming section links I should be using? Hopefully "a lot" of changes doesn't mean it's worse! I see you're busy, so no rush to look it over, I just thought I'd drop you a note about it since we edit conflicted. Wug·a·po·des 00:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Unfortunately not: the "what links here" feature lacks that ability. For redirects, it will show which ones involve a URL fragment: it shows '(redirect to section "FooBar")' instead of '(redirect page)'. It does this whether "FooBar" is an actual section name, a valid anchor or not valid at all. But for unredirected links from other pages, it has no indication whether the link has a fragment or not. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Some falafel for you! [ edit ]

Falafel award.png Thanks for the talk page stalking, friend. Σσς(Sigma) 22:04, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Face-smile.svgThank you It's surprising just how many people don't read the directions. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:16, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Misapplying WP:BOTTOMUP [ edit ]

Context: this concerns these three edits --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:32, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

You are misapplying WP:BOTTOMUP. As it says, "The latest topic should be the one at the bottom of the page." That's what I was trying to do, put the *most recent* discussion on the bottom. -MichaelBluejay (talk) 08:49, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

@Michaelbluejay: As you note, WP:BOTTOMPOST (there is no WP:BOTTOMUP) says The latest topic should be the one at the bottom of the page. That is the latest topic, not the topic having the latest post. It also says This makes it easy to see the chronological order of posts. It says nothing about moving active discussion to the bottom of the page.
When deciding which topic is latest, we use the date/time when each topic was first raised, not the date/time when a topic was last commented upon. Otherwise we'd be forever rearranging talk pages. In the case of Wikipedia talk:Verifiability, there were eleven topics in total at the time that you moved them around; you moved "Bringing this article in line with Wikipedia:Identifying and using self-published works" (initiated 15:23, 6 July 2020 (UTC)) to be after "What is the purpose of ABOUTSELF?" (initiated 16:12, 2 August 2020 (UTC)) instead of between "AfterEllen as a reliable source" (initiated 00:22, 3 July 2020 (UTC)) and "PinkNews as a reliable source" (initiated 02:49, 10 July 2020 (UTC)). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:12, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
You are inventing policy. Your interpretation isn't prescribed. "The latest topic" is easily interpreted as the one with the latest activity, which is the logical and more useful interpretation. It's not easy to see the chronological order of posts when an active discussion is buried in the middle of the page, with several dead discussions after it. Your argument isn't compelling, and I intend to keep moving the active discussion to the bottom of the page so it can be discussed and resolved. If you can't stand that, then I encourage you to do what you can to help SPS get defined so that topic can be closed. I'm having a hard enough time spearheading that effort without pedantic interference. -MichaelBluejay (talk) 14:51, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
No, no RR64 is not. Latest topic is at the bottom. Threatening to edit war is not generally a good idea, especially when yours is the weird interpretation. --Izno (talk) 15:04, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
@Izno: On that matter, diff. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Template : Brighton Main Line [ edit ]

Could you kindly clear up the "kink" halfway down the template where Jolly Sailor station is.

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 13:09, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

@Xenophon Philosopher: You refer, I presume, to Template:Brighton Main Line. This uses {{routemap}} and some years ago I stated that I would not maintain RDTs which use that template, so the breakage is not mine. All I can do is revert the most recent edits, prior to which it seems to look OK. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:32, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
@Xenophon Philosopher: I've fixed it. Mjroots (talk) 17:50, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help in this matter.

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 18:19, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Easton railway station (England) [ edit ]

Thanks for the feedback about the dates, it's been a long time since I've edited much on WP! I shall remember for future reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BennH (talkcontribs) 09:40, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

5593 Page edit [ edit ]

The information included regarding 5593 Kolhapur being overhauled is genuine and a genuine link from vintage trains itself was included in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:FC8F:9100:5516:42B7:C392:63F2 (talk) 22:28, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Please do not use Wikipedia to appeal for funding. That counts as promoting a cause, which is forbidden. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:49, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
The article isnt appealing for funding it's just advertising what Tyseley are running. The RailAdvent link can be included as the only link if required.2A00:23C5:FC8F:9100:5516:42B7:C392:63F2 (talk) 00:06, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
What part of "an appeal was launced to fund an overhaul for 5593 with the goal of returning to steam" is not an appeal for funding? The railadvent link that you provided even has the line in it "You can donate or join The Kolhapur Club by clicking here." Even if you are "just advertising what Tyseley are running", that is still promotion. We are not in the business of running adverts: try Fandom, a.k.a. Wikia. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:59, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
Also, Moylesy98, what part of "you are evading a block using IPs and all your edits may be reverted" is proving difficult to understand? Black Kite (talk) 12:21, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Template : Aberystwyth and Welsh Coast Railway [ edit ]

Could I seek your opinion on the validity of station name edits on Template:Aberystwyth and Welsh Coast Railway made by @NT79 in June 2020, as no-one has seen fit to make these type of amendments, including highly respected editors such as your good self, in past years. Do you think the changes made should be reverted?

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 21:29, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Xenophon Philosopher: As ever, please provide a link to the page that you are referring to, ideally with diffs where appropriate. I neither have the time, nor am in the mood, to go hunting for whatever it is you are currently having difficulties with. Unless you know the identity of the six juveniles who went for me on three separate occasions this evening. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:02, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
My apologies, the required link has been added to my original query, as requested. I was unaware that you had been targeted by a group of six juveniles. I trust that the police will be successful in tracing these miscreants.
Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 00:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Did you bring up the matter at the template's talk page (no), at the talk page of WT79 (talk · contribs) (no) or at an appropriate WikiProject talk page (also, no)? Am I the primary editor of the template? Again, no - all I ever did there was this which hardly puts me in the number 1 position for explaining somebody else's edits. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:12, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Take care, Redrose. I know it’s awkward for me to say this but I hope for the best for you. At times like this, crime rate is high. We can get through this VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 16:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Can I ask therefore one final question. Is the the policy for Wikipedia to use the final used station name in articles when earlier station names have been carried?
Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 22:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
WP:NCUKSTATIONS. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:59, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

RFCs on Korean Television Show [ edit ]

Okay. Are you saying, first, that the bot is looking at the sentence immediately after the RFC tag as the topic sentence to publicize? If so, okay. Second, are you saying that starting two RFCs in the same edit causes some sort of confusion? If so, I will remember to avoid it. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:06, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: As shown at WP:RFCBRIEF, Legobot will copy the markup of your statement (from the end of the {{rfc}} tag through the first timestamp) to the list of active RfCs. That is what it did here - notice that only one of your two RfCs was copied, and that it lacked the question. Second, see this edit - Legobot set the two |rfcid= to identical values. They must be unique, since not only are they used as the anchor for inward links, they are also used by Legobot in its private data tables that list current RfCs. If two have the same rfcid value, only one of them can be monitored by Legobot. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:57, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Question: "Normal order of cat[egorie]s?" [ edit ]

Greetings and felicitations. In the comment for your reversion of my edit to the article "Spean Bridge railway station" you wrote in part "restore normal order of cats". The only rule with which I am familiar is to place the primary category—the one with a space—at the top of the list. E.g., [[Category:World War II| ]] for World War II. I was informed years ago of a system for ordering film and television, but have not seen much of it recently. However, under this impetus I just dug it out: Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Categorization. But there does not seem to be a similar rule for WikiProject Television.

Anyway, what is the "normal order" of categories? The Manual of Style does not seem to mention this. (While per your request I've added this page to my watch list, a ping or the equivalent mention of my username is a much better guarantee of getting my attention.) —DocWatson42 (talk) 06:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@DocWatson42: I didn't revert you, not entirely - if I had, the images would have moved back to their previous positions, and the shortdesc might also have been lost. Anyway, it's a question of relevance (Normally the most essential, significant categories appear first.), of defining characteristics. What is it? A railway station. Where is it? Highland (council area). Who owned/operates it, when did it open? These are all more relevant than the fact that it is a Category C listed building or that it was designed by James Miller. Some years ago, I worked through a large number of railway station articles that other people had worked upon to see what the favoured order is, and broadly speaking, I came up with User:Redrose64#Railway Stations (although I need to update that redlink, and check some of the others). Any cat that is not covered by that table would be placed after those. At Wikipedia talk:Categorization/Archive 16#Proposing a change to the WP:CATDEF wording, look for the phrase "dog monuments" to see how irrelevant some cats can be, and how alphabetical ordering can boost their prominence above more significant cats. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! [ edit ]

I honestly didn't know about those birth and death templates! Really appreciate your advise, I'll have to note this for any articles in create for the WiR project in future. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 10:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@Chris.sherlock: They are linked from the navboxes at the bottom of the various template doc pages, although you may need to expand the navbox sections. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:56, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
Huh... never noticed that before. Thanks once again! - Chris.sherlock (talk) 11:07, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Appeal for help [ edit ]

Profound greetings I just want you to edit template wikiproject football and extend it for Greece as well as Greek task force of association football is created and it requires extension of Greek lag and the text on that template.


SHISHIR DUA 12:52, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@SHISHIR DUA: First, you need to make your proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football and gain consensus there - this will take a minimum of one week, probably longer. Once that has been achieved, make a WP:TPER request at Template talk:WikiProject Football, linking to the consensus discussion. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for endowin' me with the procedure SHISHIR DUA 08:31, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Rail-header2 [ edit ]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Rail-header2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 16:26, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Protected drafts [ edit ]

Hey RR, saw you deleted/create protected the single letter drafts, thanks for that. Do you want to do the same with the single numbers, Draft:0, Draft:2, Draft:3, Draft:4, Draft:5 etc.? Best, UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@UnitedStatesian:Draft:0, Draft:2, Draft:3 are  Done; Draft:1 is Already salted; Draft:4, Draft:5 are yellow tickY Partly done - along with Draft:6, Draft:7 and Draft:9 they have too few create/delete cycles to justify a salt; Draft:8 has never been created. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:06, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Ashford International [ edit ]

Hi, thanks for the edit and message. I must admit to using the automatic reference tool, which as it looked ok, I pressed ok. Thanks for the reminder, will take more care in future. Bellminsterboy (talk) 19:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

High Speed North [ edit ]

Hi, we met a couple of years ago at a meetup in The Four Candles. I am seeking help with correcting what I think is a serious error. The Article 'Northern Powerhouse Rail' was re-named 'High Speed North' (Moved? - I don't understand the terminology). See Talk:High Speed North#Re-naming mistake?. I have tried to do what I can, but have not succeeded in getting a response either on the Talk page or from a talk message to User talk:Ejosm#Possible mistake in renaming 'Northern Powerhouse Rail' 'High Speed North'?. I would be most grateful if you would review the evidence that I have provided and, if you agree, advise me as to how to put things right.--TedColes (talk) 10:35, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Replied at Talk:Northern Powerhouse Rail#Re-naming mistake?. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:25, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Revert [ edit ]

Regarding your revert of my addition of a Short Description on London Underground C69 and C77 Stock, I did read the article and still don't see what is wrong with my SD. But if you thought it could have been improved, why did you not do so in the spirit of collaboration instead of reverting with a snarky edit summary. MB 22:27, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

MB, while you may mean "passenger car" as rolling stock, to most people it means an automobile. Even if you meant it as rolling stock, a car is a single carriage of the unit, not the unit itself - it would be like saying that a house is a type of kitchen. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:13, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Mattbuck, We have rolling stock that says it means anything that rolls - engine, freight cars, cabooses, etc. Yes, I meant a passenger coach, whose article is at passenger car (rail). So since that is the title of the article, and, in the context of the "Underground", it should be clear this is about a train car and not a automobile. I stand by my SD as not "rubbish" and not "a guess" by someone who did not read the article. Another editor has added a SD which just says "vehicle", which is fine also for the purposes of a SD. MB 14:48, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
It's not about a car/coach/carriage/vehicle. It's about a group of coach designs collectively known as the C Stock. There are C69 driving motors, C69 trailers, C77 driving motors and C77 trailers. One driving motor and one trailer (usually both C69 or both C77, but not necessarily) were semi-permanently coupled into pairs, known as "units", having a driving cab at one end. A train could be formed of either two or three units (which need not have been all C69 or all C77), having a driving cab at both ends. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:10, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
The lead of rolling stock may be of interest, then. It says "The term rolling stock in the rail transport industry refers to railway vehicles...". If the short descriptions are going to reflect reality as you and reliable sources understand it, the leads of relevant articles need to reflect that reality. In any event, the current local short description appears to be a far sight better than the Wikidata one that was being shown before. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:41, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Regarding my edit [ edit ]

You recently removed my edit on the named Class 323.

I can confirm it is notable as it so far the only class 323 to have ever been named as far as Information on named class 323s goes.

I have a photo of 323241 baring the names I listed and I have permission to from the photo owner to upload the photo as long as they are credited which I would credit them, would this be allowed on Wikiapeda and would be be acceptable as evidence?

Also I’m sorry for what I put being contradictory, I should have checked what I wrote before publishing it.

For the moment I have now asked WMT about this on Twitter, if they confirm that 323241 carries the names I added would this be acceptable as evidence? Maurice Oly (talk) 11:18, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Please find a third-party reliable source, in accordance with the policy on verifiability. Photos and tweets are not sufficient. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:44, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry about the source [ edit ]

Hey I just want to say I’m really sorry about having to use twitter as a source on the class 323 page but sadly that’s all there is.

Sadly West Midlands Trains did not do a press event for the naming of 323241, it was only done at soho TMD and by depo staff not head office staff.

I asked West midlands trains on twitter to confirm it but sadly somebody else confirmed it before WMT did.

Sadly due to the naming ceremony being held at soho TMD no members of the press were aware of the event, I only found out about the event via a facebook group of which some WMT train crew who attended the event are a part of.

I hate using twitter as a source as I know it can be unreliable but sadly that’s the best source there will be, well as well as the photo I uploaded.

Again I’m really sorry for using Twitter but as I’ve said it’s all there will ever be source wise.

Many Thanks Maurice Oly. Maurice Oly (talk) 23:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I ment West Midlands railway as the TOC not the brand west midlands trains which is used my West midland Railway my bad. Maurice Oly (talk) 23:19, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Like Twitter, Facebook is not appropriate. Try the railway press, such as Modern Railways, Rail, and The Railway Magazine - these are generally considered reliable. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:03, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Thx much [ edit ]

for selecting the topic areas. Humanengr (talk) 21:20, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Spanish sports categories [ edit ]

Hi Redrose64: The appropriate category for the 2020 Pinatar Cup article is Category:March 2020 sports events in Spain (part of a tree) not Category:2020 sports events in Spain. Hugo999 (talk) 22:55, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Hugo999: Why are you telling me this? I have never edited that page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:39, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

RFC at Milhist [ edit ]

I have removed the RFC tag which I assume will correct the issue. Apologies for the inconvenience. Mztourist (talk) 03:20, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Face-smile.svgThank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:40, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Request to use part of a photo [ edit ]

I needed part of a photo for an article and it shows you are the one who created it. I just discovered this photo and realize while the middle section is not ideal, it's better than the current photo of St. John's Lutheran Church (Salisbury, North Carolina).

Do you know who could make this happen?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:02, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: My part in creating File:Mint Museum in uptown Charlotte, North Carolina crop.jpg was, as shown in the summary on the file description page, limited to cropping down an existing image - File:Mint Museum in uptown Charlotte, North Carolina.jpg. You could crop down File:SalisburyNCMontageUpdated.jpg, but since it's a montage of several component images, it would be better to ask its uploader, Kharris0317 (talk · contribs), where to find the component you wish to use solo. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:55, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. I don't know how to crop but you apparently do.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:13, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
There are various utilities. I use one called ZoomBrowser EX which came with my Canon camera, but you can use Adobe Photoshop, IrfanView, Microsoft Office Picture Manager, or even Microsoft Paint. With most of them, you load an image, select the crop (or trim) tool, drag the edges about, click an "OK" (or "Confirm") button, then save it. Make sure that you save it with a new name so as not to damage the original, just in case the new version was unsuitable and needs to be redone. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:59, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Someone did show me how to use Paint for screenshots when I was asking questions on WP:VPT or the reference desk. And I have used something similar with NewsBank and— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:54, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I will need that person to help me again and during COVID-19 that's unlikely.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:58, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Pardon me for joining in. The best software by far for simple cropping and rescaling is Irfanview (mentioned above). I've used it for years for mostly just those two simple tasks. If you want help with a specific image, happy to help/instruct. Bazza (talk) 08:44, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Bookku [ edit ]

They have almost 4000 edits - I'd assumed they were a new editor until I checked. You'd think they'd be more capable. Doug Weller talk 15:11, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Indian subcontinent [ edit ]

I have made the correction you suggested, and that helped to get some comments already. But won't you participate? Aditya(talkcontribs) 23:29, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Busy in real life? Face-sad.svg Aditya(talkcontribs) 08:33, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes. I have a job, and unlike a lot of people in this country, I have not been sent home to mooch around for weeks on end. Since March, I've done extra time covering for people who have stayed at home; and that will include tomorrow. My taxes pay for their furlough. No, I won't participate, my interest was solely on getting the bad entry in the RfC listings fixed, and this fix to a badly-constructed list. I do wish people would read the directions. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:57, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Sorry for bothering. I am. Doing 70+ hours a week myself, plus some 20 hours of commute (transport is difficult these days). I think I understand the pain somewhat. Hopefully we shall meet again on nicer grounds someday. Thanks for the help. Face-smile.svg I was just impatient about low participation (which partly is because the RfC was "malformed", unfortunately). As for instructions... I think only the most work-free people has the time to read the thousands of pages of instruction WP has these days. I am not one of them. Aditya(talkcontribs) 23:46, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Crewe to Shrewsbury Railway [ edit ]

Hi RedRose64

I saw you reverted my edit on the article of Crewe and Shrewsbury Railway but called it constructive. May I just ask why as the line still sees use and isn't a former railway as the article mentioned "was a railway that connected Crewe to Shrewsbury". I understand the line isn't under that name anymore but it's still in use aside from the branch lines.

I'm just curious why its constructive but I've reverted to a more constructive lead. If you can fill me in on what is unconstructive about it. I'd appreciate it.

Thank you kindly

Signed: RailwayJG, 25th September 2020, 19:25. RailwayJG (talk) 18:25, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Meant unconstructive sorry auto correct RailwayJG (talk) 18:26, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

You refer, I presume, to this edit (when querying an edit, you should always provide a WP:DIFF), The grammar and spelling are bad. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:40, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

A dog [ edit ]

Hi Redrose...I was about to create an article titled "Gerberian Shepsky" but I can't....can you help. It has a redirect to cross-breeds but I think it can have its own page. Whispyhistory (talk) 19:14, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

It was redirected following (but not as a consequence of) this AfD. You could ask Cunard (talk · contribs), who redirected it, or just WP:BEBOLD - it's not protected. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:23, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
I'd like to be bold but I don't know how...maybe Philafrenzy or Edwardx could kindly stub and I'll expand. One of them kindly forwarded some scientific evidence on dog eye muscles. Whispyhistory (talk) 19:40, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
First follow the link Gerberian Shepsky, this takes you to a point part-way down List of dog crossbreeds. Go to the top, and below the page title and the familiar text "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" is a line reading "(Redirected from Gerberian Shepsky)". Click that link, and you reach the redirect itself. Either edit that directly, or click its history tab and select an old version to view. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:09, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
I had a go...thank you. Whispyhistory (talk) 20:18, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Something about how their eyes have evolved to appeal to us I think. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:56, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
What is this?