User talk:Grblundell
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Grblundell, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Roleplayer 19:40, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi GR. Can you please add some additional information as to why St. Andrew's Church in Plymouth is of particular note. Thanks. Verica Atrebatum 07:57, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I've got to admit I'm working by exception here. Plymouth was in the original list that I shipped across; I haven't seen a good reason for saying that it's NOT of note; both times it has been removed have coincided with other edits in that part of the article, so I conclude - the removal was accidental - there is no good reason to remove it - so it shouold be reintroduced.
I hope I'm not over-interpreting your remark! To try and meet the other possible explanation (ie that there is no explanation of why it is of merit) I will do little bit of light editing in a moment or two...
Thanks for the advice!
Cheers
GRB Grblundell 18:29, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hi GR. I had actually removed both the Liverpool and Plymouth entries deliberately. My worry is that the list will become totally overpopulated and thus meaningless. I have already left a suggestion on the article's talk page concerning this. As most CofE churches are notable in some way, I have suggested that those listed are only the most notable of all, preferably only those given three, four or five stars in Jenkins' 'England's Thousand Best Churches'. If some such criteria are not set, everyone creating an article for their local church will add it to the list. What do you think? Verica Atrebatum 08:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm. I hadn't looked at the Talk page. My apologies - and I will put most of an equivalent comment to this there so it's easier for others to find. But while I share your concern about the list growing too long, I think you are possibly applying a rather limited criterion in only considering the architecture of churches. So I'm adding a little bit of text to why (in my opinion - and I know it can be edited back out!) churches might be considered of interest, and adding a few examples.
- Many thanks once again, not just for the care you are spending on this article, but for the time and effort you're putting in on educating me! Grblundell 08:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 21:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Template:Schools in Berkshire
[edit]You moved Mary Hare Grammar School into the independent school section. Even though it's non-maintained, it is still a state school. Surely this means it should be in the grammar school section? robertvan1 18:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- The school's page shouldn't be taken as correct, the [{Department for Children, Schools and Families]] lists the school as such: [1] and directgov lists it as scuch: [2]. On the DCSF site, it states clearly 'IND' on the list and directgov states 'State, special school, non-maintained special'. I believe that the DCSF and directgov are both government related and more reliable sources that the school's own website, do you disagree? robertvan1 20:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I made a typo there. On the DSCF site, if the school was an independent school it would say 'IND'. So if we compare Mary Hare to a school we is indisputably independent, say Downe House you can see here that it states 'IND' rather prominently. robertvan1 20:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Peter John Haworth Doyle, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.catholicassociation.co.uk/groups/northbish.shtml. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 08:37, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
unblock please
[edit]{{unblock-auto|1=149.254.192.192|2=Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Bauer Technologies Ltd.". The reason given for Bauer Technologies Ltd.'s block is:}}
- I did the block on Bauer Technologies Ltd., but there appears to be no autoblock for that user. Nishkid64 (talk) 02:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ah it seems SQL handled this request seconds before I checked it out. :-P Nishkid64 (talk) 02:27, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Heads up on my intended changes to Peter John Haworth Doyle
[edit](second attempt) Thought I ought to point you to my recent addition to the talk page. Any comments? BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philip Trueman (talk • contribs) 10:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Jim Murphy
[edit]Hi, I just wanted to say well done reverting the deletions of content by Eastren07 (talk · contribs) from Jim Murphy and from Talk:Jim Murphy. I ahve added a formal warning on User talk:Eastren07.
My watchlist is fairly crowded, so I may not spot any further vandalism. If you spot any further vandalism before I do, please could you drop me a note?
Meanwhile, I have deleted the section which you and I agreed should go, out of WP:BLP concerns. It seems to me to better that an article should be incomplete than to risk it being labelled as an attack page. But we can discuss that at Talk:Jim Murphy#Neutrality. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- More deletions, so I went to ANI: see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Eastren07_deleting_material. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Do you have the book The History of Slough by Maxwell Fraser? Only I noticed you added the book as a reference to the History of Slough article, and some of us at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Greater Manchester are wondering if Slough Trading Estate really is the first industrial estate in the world as we have a reference for another place as being the first. Trafford Park, a good 20 years earlier. I think this may be a case of different sources using different criteria for industrial estates. If not nevermind. Thanks. Nev1 (talk) 21:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
St Joesphs primary school bracknell
[edit]Howdy. I noticed that in your edit summary for this edit to St Joesphs primary school bracknell you asked how to rename an article without redirecting it. I suspect you are wanting to move this article to a properly-spelled title (perhaps St Joseph's Primary School, Bracknell or St Joseph's Primary School Bracknell). To move an article, first visit the article. You should see a tab marked "move" near the "edit" and "history" tabs. You can use this to move the article. This will create a redirect from the old title to the new title, but the redirect can be deleted later if necessary. If you'd like me to move the page for you, just let me know what you want the new title to be and I'll take care of it. You may also find Help:Moving a page useful. Michael Slone (talk) 20:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- The article is certainly much better for your edits. Good luck with your project of encouraging good contributions. Michael Slone (talk) 17:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Peter Hain
[edit]I agree with you its not clear who called him a racist, I did read some other articles about the meeting to try and establish the date, and may have got the impression it was Peter Tatchell rather than Muggabe as it might make more sense as the thrust of Muggabe's insults were directed at his imagined view of Hain's sexuality. BTW I have a picture of Jim Murphy as there is not one on his article. He seemed a decent chap. --Gibnews (talk)
- Thinking about it I already uploaded my picture and it seems someone has removed it. I shall have another go ! --Gibnews (talk) 22:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Parish church
[edit]I've added a reference (though it's not showing as a footnote for some reason), but it's a bit odd to revert my (accurate) edit for lack of reference when the main article has no reference. Bloovee (talk) 00:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Hyperlink added 15 July 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloovee (talk • contribs) 12:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
In response to your query here, the reason for the jump in figures is that the method of compiling the usage statistics has changed. Previously, where there was more than one station in a group (e.g. in a city centre, like Liverpool, Birmingham or Manchester), most tickets sold to "Liverpool Stations" were counted towards the largest station (e.g. Lime Street). This meant that for second-largest stations the figures were ludicrously wide of the mark. Now they've found a better way of doing it. This explains the change from 1.2 million to 7 million. Regards, --RFBailey (talk) 08:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes indeed - over the same period, Lime St fell from 14.4 million to 7.2 and James St rose from 0.209 to 1.552. Best wishes, DGEred (talk) 18:46, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- I've started a discussion about this here. --RFBailey (talk) 11:31, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
unblock please
[edit]
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:50, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Hagley
[edit]
Hi Grblundell! An article you have been involved with has been tagged by its parent project as being in need of a little attention or further development. If you can help with these minor issues please see [[talk:Hagley]. --Kudpung (talk) 06:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Re: Thank you
[edit]No probs mate, totally agree, some interesting edits that IP's had lol (talk) 10:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
re:Thank you...
[edit]No problem; I'm glad to revert the vandalism. Gotta love Huggle! -sesuPRIME 23:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Apologies...
[edit]Grblundell, I'm afraid I have to apologise. I hadn't noticed, but my Wikipedia account login was stored on my houses' communal computer, meaning my little brother thought it would be fun to vandalise articles and/or insult people who stopped him. I can only apologise, and say that I've now changed my password, and it won't happen again. TheDoctor248
Articles for deletion nomination of Priory School (Slough)
[edit]
I have nominated Priory School (Slough), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priory School (Slough). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Fæ (talk) 08:19, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Levett house colour
[edit]Thank you for joining in on this. I have been 'toggling' on this over many months with a number of anonymous editors presumably OEs - finishing up with one who identified himself as 'Woody'.
The 'facts' seem to be that the colour was initially (ie from 1951) brown, but is currently white. Woody tells me that 'white' shows on school photos post c2000, and somewhere along the line I have identified that brown was still in use c1982.
I don't think the strictest application of the citation rule is particularly appropriate here, where all the evidence derives solely from Old Edwardians, in particular myself, and I assume as long as we identify ourselves as bona fide editors then we are merely trying to establish a correct record. My view is that a colour change is no more or less important or trivial than the basic record of the colour itself, which by many standards is in itself a bit over the top anyway.
A final point, which I accept may be utterly trivial, is the extraordinary nature of the change. What on earth sort of a colour is 'white' and what could have been the motivation for adopting it?
Are you prepared to negotiate on this with a view to putting something back?
Best regards, Flying Stag (talk) 14:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Re: Belper School
[edit]Hello Grblundell. You're most certainly welcome, thank you for your message. You're actually the fourth or fifth user I've encountered over the past couple of months, who've experienced similar problems while editing with their mobile phone. In almost all of these cases, they have accidentally truncated the entire lower page (interwiki-links, categories, reflist, nav-templates, etc.) while reverting vandalism. This suggests to me that mobile phones probably aren't the idea tool for the task... but I still applaud you for jumping in and taking a swing at the vandalism on sight. A good habit perhaps, would be to always double-check your phone-based reverts to make sure the page-foot is still intact. Happy editing Grblundell, have yourself a great day :). -- WikHead (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
As a contributor to this article, you may be interested to know I have nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrian Hilton. Robofish (talk) 01:46, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 22
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited St Mary's Church, Whitegate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chime (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) 11:23, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Prime Ministers...
[edit]Thank you so much for the citation on Sunny Jim. I still can't believe we've found every one. Requiescat in pace. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 21:39, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
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) 16:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Grblundell. 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)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Grblundell. 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)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Grblundell. 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)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
[edit] | 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 |
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit] | 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 |
Disambiguation link notification for December 13
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cippenham, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Burnham. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |