Jump to content

User talk:Oosoom

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mayalld (talk | contribs) at 14:32, 13 September 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Howdy, Oosoom, Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions, you seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics! If you need help on how to title new articles see the naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. For general questions goto Wikipedia:Help or the FAQ, if you can't find your answer there check the Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. If you have any more questions after that, feel free to ask me directly on my user talk page.

Additional tips

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!

Be Bold!!

You can find me at my user page or talk page for any questions. Happy editing, and we'll see ya 'round.

Joe I 17:55, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feral fox?

Why is this fox referred to as feral? Is there some reason to think that it has been domesticated and released? --Yath 20:40, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Not what I meant to say. I think I should say urban fox? Oosoom 11:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I saw this picture, and I thought it was amazing - completely not related to Wikipedia, but did the fox get the rabbit? It looks like it has just about figured out how to open it up. Amazing picture, anyway. Zuwxiv 07:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was amazing that the fox was not at all perturbed by me statnding only ten feet away with a camera. I chased it away in the end. Oosoom Talk to me 10:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Telegraph Industry

Thanks for all your recent entries on Birmingham and the various companies. You might like to know that my brother is submitting his PhD thesis on the History of the Telegraphic Industry upto 1868 for examination in September this year. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucftrnb/ From what he has told me it will overturn much of the conventional writing on the subject as a result of his going back to original material that has never been looked at before. I feel sure that it will eventually appear in book form.DonBarton 20:32, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edmund Street

What a wonderful map, particularly when it is enlarged. Pity you had difficulty in loading it on to the Edmund Street article. Odd that you and I are virtually the sole contributors to the articles on these magnificent buildings on the Colmore Estate and what a shame so few writers give adequate sources for their entries. Whilst on about sources - Did you know that the gates on the Bell Telephone building are allegedly (by some of the staff who work there) to be by Morris & Co.?. I havn't tracked a confirmatory source for that info.--DonBarton 08:39, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Hall of Memory Birmingham.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hall of Memory Birmingham.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Whoops! Now tagged GDFL-self. Oosoom 14:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edmund Street.

I forgot how what the number was and who the architect was but I would have added it if I knew. I will try to find out in the coming weeks. In response to the all capitals caption, I'm sorry about that, I think I did not notice I was writing in that when I did it!

Also, thanks for your contributions to Birmingham articles! - Erebus555 17:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging

Hi!

I noticed that you say "Image may be freely used for any legal and moral purpose.", but tag with {{GFDL-self}}. Wouldn't {{PD-self}} be a better tag for that statement. // Liftarn

Handbells was my first image upload. I now use GDFL-self for all images. I have not taken advice on this. What's the difference? Oosoom Talk to me 15:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I just thought it was a bit odd. There are some major differences between GDFL and PD. GFDL requires that everything that include GFDL content must be licensed according to GFDL while with PD you are free to do as you wish. I just thought your comment sounded more like PD than GFDL. // Liftarn
I have removed the statement from my images so they are now just GFDL-self. Oosoom Talk to me 21:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia editing.

The Author's Barnstar
I herby award you this barnstar for your article creation and extensive contributions to articles related to Birmingham. People like you should be commonplace on Wikipedia to make the project great. Thanks and keep it up! - Erebus555Chit chat. 16:57, 7 May 2006
Many thanks for this. Oosoom Talk to me 18:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sarehole

Unconvinced I checked a map [1] only to find you are correct. A strange finger of Worcestershire temporarily prodded through Warwickshire during the Victorian era incorporating Sarehole. Meaning that Edgbaston and Acocks Green were in Warwickhire - but Wake Green in between was actually in Worcestershire. You learn something new every day here.--Mrmusichead 15:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Barnstar!!*

The Photographer's Barnstar
I award you this for all your helpful images you've uploaded, Andeh is very displeased you haven't already got one! Andeh 13:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very many thanks for your generous award. Appreciation is always welcome. :) Oosoom Talk to me 15:36, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Blue plaque Ram Mohan Roy.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Blue plaque Ram Mohan Roy.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Now tagged GDFL-self. Sorry, and thanks. Oosoom Talk to me 15:14, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Wikipedia:Requested articles

Your recent edit to Wikipedia:Requested articles (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 15:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your images.

Thanks alot for the latest images you have added to the Birmingham building articles. They are greatly appreciated and they really help them! Happy editting! - Erebus555 15:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hancock picture

I retouched your picture of Hancock's statue in Birmingham and uploaded the new version to commons for use with the Swedish Hancock article. I guess that's ok when it comes to copyright laws and things, and hope you don't mind. Mlewan 19:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad it was useful. It's fine in this case as it draws attention to the subject, although I can imagine cases where a photo may have more than one subject, or be trying to show the main subject in context, in which case cropping or blurring could be a removal of useful information. Luckily I used another photo in the article on Methodist Central Hall. No doubt for some retouching you would have to save under a new name to preserve the usefulness of the original for other articles. How about a cross-language link from the English article on Hancock? Best wishes. Oosoom Talk to me 09:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I left your original picture in the English article, as I thought English readers may have more interest in the Birmingham connection than Swedes do, so they would not want it blurred out. A cross-language link is already present. The Swedes have the only other wiki article in the world about Hancock, apparently. Mlewan 12:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image size

I believe that images should be generally entered as thumb, without an explicit size, so that individual users can choose what size is best for them in terms of download bandwidth (speed and cost), and in terms of ink used when printing (particularly for drafts of changes). I appreciate the value of a good colourful photograph in the right place in an article, but:

  • if you like big pictures you can set your default in my preferences
  • if you like small pictures, then ditto
  • different browsers will show different things to different people
  • viewing on a different screen size will chanqe the appearance greatly from the "ideal" set by one editor on a given computer

That's why I use thumb anyway. Oosoom Talk to me 10:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Hi there, Oosoom:

The points that you make about using thumb all make sense. I had not noticed the option to change the default thumbnail size within my preferences, despite being here for quite a length of time. Indeed, that may be the one disadvantage of it, that many people may not know that they have that ability. Thanks for alerting me to it anyhow!

Best wishes, iinag

You're welcome. Oosoom Talk to me 10:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Blue plaques

I thought I would drop you a note out of courtesy that I have recommended for deletion and listification the category you created for the Blue Plaque scheme, and its sub-categories for people and buildings. My reasons for this are simply that by using a category rather than a list, the key encyclopeidc information of who/where is lost - and not that I think the information is not useful or encyclopedic. Rgds, - Trident13 11:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your comments and courtesy. :) Copy of my vote: Strong Keep – for both buildings and people. Buildings can be notable, either because of whom they once housed, or for a totally different reason, perhaps they are a famous theatre, or a historic factory. I am not sure whether your list would be colour specific. The term blue plaque seems to be the generally accepted term even for plaques which are not blue. I take it to mean a circular monument of any colour. This seems to be how bodies such as English Heritage and those linked externally in the Blue plaques article define them. Despite the main text of the Blue plaque article the awarding bodies are not just English Heritage and the London councils. They are all over England, I have found (and added to category) one in Wales, I don't know whether there are more, and they exist in Northern Ireland [2]. I would favour keeping the categories. I find categories useful for browsing related articles and exploring unrelated people or buildings with something in common. The fact that a category does not link a person to a building does not reduce this usefulness. The article itself should describe the relationship. Perhaps a list for people and a list for buildings as well as these categories. My current interest is with architecture and history of buildings so I would appreciate indexing from that direction as well. I vote Strong Keep on the assumption that the recording of historical memorials is not frivolous. I realise that blue plaques in parts of the UK may not be of world-wide interest, but they are a very visible and characteristic sight to tourists. The fact that they have been awarded for 140 years suggests that they are not trivial. Oosoom Talk to me 23:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Link to deletion debate [3]. Oosoom Talk to me 15:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change to Common.css

Per recent discussions, the way in which Persondata is viewed by Wikipedia editors has changed. In order to continue viewing Persondata in Wikipedia articles, please edit your user CSS file to display table.persondata rather than table.metadata. More specific instructions can be found on the Persondata page. --ShakingSpirittalk on behalf of Kaldari 01:38, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

West Midlands Wikiproject

Hey there.

I notice you are editting numerous articles to do with Birmingham so I thought it maybe possible to for you to show your interest in participating in a West Midlands Wikiproject: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#West_Midlands. If you are interested, just add your user name under the appropriate heading. Thanks a lot - Erebus555 15:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Old Joe

Hi, Oosoom. I restored some links you removed to "Old Joe", a blackface minstrel song from the 19th century. The appropriate course in situations like this is generally to create a disambiguation page, not to delink a term that doesn't have an article yet. I went ahead and made Old Joe a disambiguation page. As for red links, they are okay; they alert us that we need an article. Thanks, — BrianSmithson 10:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Oosoom Talk to me 10:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject West Midlands

The West Midlands WikiProject is now active! As your edits focus on articles under the West Midlands scope, then you maybe interested in adding your name to the participants list and participating in the project. Thanks! - Erebus555 15:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dove's Guide

Hi. I was wondering what your rational was for renaming the article Dove's Bellringer's Guide to the Church Bells of Britain? The original article name was a compromise of the true book title, and an inclusion of the author's name. I have subsequently been of the opinion that it should have been the correct title on its own. Your new name does not at all reflect the name of the book. :) Oosoom Talk to me 14:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC), copied from User talk:Doops[reply]

Hi. Yes, it is tough when the author's name has become part of the book's title. My favorite example is the classic guide to Latin prose composition, originally written by Thomas Arnold, than revised by somebody named Bradley, and then further revised by somebody called Mountford — the book is usually called Bradley's Arnold: [4]. (I, of course, sometimes liked calling it Mountford's Bradley's Arnold.)
At any rate, I didn't just make up a name haphazardly; "Dove's Guide for Church Bell Ringers" really does seem to be its current working title: [5]. It hasn't been published in book form since 2000 and today's active form is the website; I think unless there's good reason otherwise a page's name and first sentence should refer to the current situation. In this case, doing so also considerably simplified things. Thanks, Doops | talk 18:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OS Grid Ref precision

Thanks for adding coordinates to pages. May I suggest that, if you convert any more OS Grid Refs, less precision is used. For instance, 52.548|N|1.932|W instead of 52.54833|N|1.93212|W. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Precision. Thanks, Andy Mabbett 09:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reference. I think that would be very apropriate for places. As I read it, that approximates to a six-figure NGR or 100 meters. I think an extra decimal place would be useful to identify individual buildings, as stated in the guidelines. Incidentally, I think it essential to include OS grid refs in UK articles as that is the only system usable with paper maps and the only system likely to be familiar to British people. And if you go out exploring with only OS maps and some printouts of Wikipedia articles then you can't convert coordinates on the move! Oosoom Talk to me 10:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with all you say - but additionally, coordinates are of more use than OS refs to overseas readers (think "Google Maps"!) and to GPS users - especially as we're starting to implement the Geo microformat. Andy Mabbett 10:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Following your link to Geo, and then to Geo in Wikipedia, I ended up at Great Barr, one of the examples of use of the coord template. This prints a reference implying accuracy to 3m from an input reference implying 110m. Not a good demonstration. Oosoom Talk to me 12:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks; Coord is undergoing some revisions; I've raised the issue of inappropriate precision there. Andy Mabbett 17:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also note your comments about on your membership note on the Waterways project pages. I'm happy to add an additional column to tables of coordinates on UK articles (see, for example, Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal). Do you think 6 digits is adequate precision, or would you like to see more? Do you think they need to link to map sources, if the WGS84 coordinates already do? Andy Mabbett 09:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I guess six figures (100m) is fine for reading a paper map, and it's all most folk will be familiar with. A higher precision may be useful for jumping to map resources (Google map/satellite, MAGIC) to indicate the exact location or appearance of a structure or feature, but that can be handled by coord lat/long if given as well, so no need to link OS in that case. There is another problem - the more precision you use the more you find there are discrepancies between the various maps. Pointing to a building on google will point to something else in MAGIC, so for high precision coordinates you really need to indicate which map source was used to find them. All rather tricky.
It would be nice if coord could translate lat/long into whatever national grid is appropriate for the country and show it alongside the lat/long, but that would be an enormous feat. Oosoom Talk to me 09:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Engine Arm Aqueduct

Hi,

I moved Engine Arm Aqueduct to Engine Arm, because there seemed to be much more content about the canal than the actual aqueduct. Does that seem reasonable, to you? Andy Mabbett 16:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was quick! Yes, I was wondering myself, although Engine Arm does not give many clues that it is a canal.  :) Oosoom Talk to me 16:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think there are enough clues ;-) Seriously, it could be Engine Arm Canal, if you wish. Is there pedestrian access from a nearby street, or only along the towpath? Andy Mabbett 16:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I walked from Gas St to Galton Bridge but you can readily get to the canal at various points - Brasshouse Lane bridge, near the new pump engine house, or to the Engine Arm at Bridge St North, at the site of the old engine (though I didn't know it at the time). No direct access to the aqueduct as I recall. The whole stretch from Smethwick Junction is fascinating. Oosoom Talk to me 19:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dove Guide title page.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dove Guide title page.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 orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:55, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dove Guide 7th Edition cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dove Guide 7th Edition cover.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 orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:55, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dove Guide 7th Edition cover.jpg

Hello, Oosoom. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Dove Guide 7th Edition cover.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Oosoom/Gallery. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dove Guide title page.jpg

Hello, Oosoom. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Dove Guide title page.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Oosoom/Gallery. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canal junctions

Good work on the canal junctions! Where appropriate, do you think we should give the nearest pedestrian access point, from the road (as opposed to canal) network? Andy Mabbett 16:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Good point. I suspect Salford Junction will have several, not very close, nearest accesses from various arms! Oosoom Talk to me 16:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just echoing what Andy said; good work! I've expanded Salford Junction, as you may have already noticed. I certainly had not anticipated expanding it so much, once I started, I just didn't stop! Anyway, happy editing! - Erebus555 11:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I am worried that adding access from the road is likely to be original research - something to be added later as references are found. Well done on your additions! I don't intend to do all the junctions. There are millions (it seems). Oosoom Talk to me 11:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think "no OR" policy can be quietly set aside in such cases, where the information is easily verifiable by another visitor to the site, is not subjective, and is not challenged. Andy Mabbett 11:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

linking to categories

Did you know that, instead of Category:Birmingham Canal Navigations you can link to a category as Category:Birmingham Canal Navigations? Note the leading colon, in the source-code. Andy Mabbett 11:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes I did know. If you are refering to my user page then I tend to use a template to make the link one-way so that there is no distracting link back to user or talk pages in an article's (or category)'s what links here. If you are talking about something else then please explain ?? :) Oosoom Talk to me 11:40, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, just the former. Andy Mabbett 14:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


BCN Main Line

A stunning piece of work! Well done. Andy Mabbett 21:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BCN Mailing list

I think you'll like this [6]; Ray Shill posts there regularly. Andy Mabbett 22:55, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I think I will. Thanks. Oosoom Talk to me 10:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smethwick Level

Hi Oosoom,

If you have a look at Broadbridge, page 68, there is a picture taken from Brass House Lane bridge of the pump house showing the two existing levels and some people walking on the first summit of the original level. His book was published in 1974. I certainly walked along there various times between 1973 and 1977 and I remember seeing lock gates almost completely buried. I agree that some (possibly a lot) of the top level was lost as a result of subsequent cutting of lower levels. I don't have time this month, but I'll try and find some slides. I should also have some of the Titford canal take at about the same time, i.e. before and after the 1970s restoration. Pyrotec 16:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answer. Will try to track down the book you mention. The dismantled locks were on the east side of the current Old Line. I was led to believe the original canal lurched to the west (and over Telford's work) in a gentle loop north of Brasshouse Lane bridge. Oosoom Talk to me 17:19, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've looked Broadbridge and Hadfield - Canals of the West Midlands - since I wrote my reply. Both books say that the plan was to reduce the Smethwick top level by 18 foot, down to the Wolverhampton level, thereby eliminating three locks at each end of the summmit. They first duplicated the Smethwick locks (453 - 473 ft), then they dug a new canal to the south of the top summit, but 12 ft lower; and used the top summit to take away the spoil. The new canal was filled with water; that eliminated two locks at each end of the old summit, which were filled in. They then dug another new canal to the south, but 6 foot lower and used the 2nd canal to take away the spoil from the third canal. That eliminated the third lock at each end. These two books state that the top level was not destroyed, just the locks filled in. My memory is seeing only the top of the lock gates. Broadbridge (page 84) says that the Spon Lane locks were brought to light in July 1969 and destroyed by drag line excavator when the ground was prepared for a motorway. Incidentally Hadfield shows a similar view between pages 96 and 97, but it was taken from the railway end of Brasshouse Lane bridge. I cannot at the moment remember if I saw locks at both ends of the summit. I could have been there in July 1969, but the memory I'm talking about was a boat hire over Christmas / New Year either 1973 or 1974; we went into a supermarket in Smethwick to buy food for 12 people.Pyrotec 18:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I must read these. Oosoom Talk to me 22:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for referring me to Hadfield and Broadbridge. I am reading them with interest. However I have now found a 1999 reference in Ray Shill's Birmingham Canals, ISBN 0-7509-2077-7, p33, also with picture, which disputes the meaning of the path trodden in Broadbridge & Hadfield. "The footpath on the far right ... has been taken by some historians to be the route of the original 1769 canal before the summit was lowered ... It is now accepted that the original course curved across the route of the New Main Line through, or near, what is now the engine house, before swinging back on to the present course. The construction of the deep cutting ... 1826-9 caused a straightening and diversion of the Old Main Line at this point.". Impossible to prove by archaeological excavation of the air above the New Line, but very plausible from looking at a map. Best wishes. Oosoom Talk to me 19:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PoIGB

I really like the table you've added to Titford Canal, and the "{{PoIgb}}" templates, but i do find the text too small to read. Could you retain 100% text size, please? Also, please add them to the microformats project page, with a description? I've added the project banner to their talk pages, and write3n some documentation - please check it. I'd also suggest making "OS Grid Ref" and "notes" into separate columns (you can use class="note" on both). Andy Mabbett 12:20, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

see also {{PoI}} and the related {{PoIx}}, both for global use. Andy Mabbett 14:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now 100%, and I've added the Notes column. Oosoom Talk to me 18:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Andy Mabbett 19:04, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made the OS grid ref a link, too. Andy Mabbett 19:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I intentionally didn't do that as a six figure grid ref is too coarse to identify points of interest and will always point to a different feature than the WGS84 coordinates which are already linked. There can only be one correct grid reference, so that might as well be the international one. Oosoom Talk to me 19:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point; I've reverted myself. Is the documentation OK, BTW? Andy Mabbett 19:32, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the documentation. I've added a bit more, and removed display=title, which is pretty meaningless as it doesn't cause the coordinates to appear in the table. Oosoom Talk to me 20:35, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Your "title" point is well observed. I've done more tweaking, explained in my edit summaries. Andy Mabbett 21:03, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:BSicon_uLOCKSu.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:BSicon_uLOCKSu.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 22:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:BSicon_uLOCKSu.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:BSicon_uLOCKSu.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 22:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:BSicon_uLOCKSd.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:BSicon_uLOCKSd.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 22:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Canal ICONS.

Can you at least tag these as self-made? I think what you planning on doing is excellent though, do you plan to do all navigable waterways and cuts? I was aware of simmilar efforts for railways... ShakespeareFan00 22:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have done so for these two. What is wrong with the declaration in PD-self which states: "I, the creator of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. ..." Oosoom Talk to me 22:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing, which is why I've struck thru the previous comments. ShakespeareFan00 09:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I noticed your comment about editing svg files in the Template talk:Waterways legend#River Navigations. It was something I tried yesterday, but it failed. I normally use Mozilla Firefox, but yesterday I loaded the SVG plugin into Explorer. Found the uKRZu icon, got the svg code, copied it to Wordpad and changed from strong red (#be3d2c) to pale red (#d77f7e) and saved the file to my harddisk, as utKRZu. (I wanted an open canal / closed railway icon). If I saved it as a .txt file I could upload it to Wikipedia but there was only the chequered background; and if I saved it as an .svg file to my harddisk Wikipedia would not upload it. Any suggestions as to what I'm doing wrong.Pyrotec 17:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You used Wordpad rather than Notepad. I looks like you have saved the file as RTF (rich text format) rather than in the same format as the original. This has added a lot more code and stops it looking like an SVG. You also missed off the BSicon_ prefix I think.
I have only used Notepad for this type of editing (and it is only possible for simple drawings). I am now using Coreldraw X3 after struggling with Inkscape but there are some incompatibilities. Coreldraw lets you save hollow objects (ie, with transparent holes) as SVG, but they display on Wikipedia without the holes so I have to draw holes as white objects. Some of the original icons are not shape objects but straight or curved lines with an outline, which does not scale properly in Coreldraw. Still trying to see which is better.
I'm not sure how your required icon would be different from ueKRZu? Doesn't ut mean dotted blue? Good luck. Oosoom Talk to me 09:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. You're right its not needed because I was trying to make ueKRZu, but I did not know it was there, as it was not in the template at the time. It was wordpad that I used. I've now put Inkscape on my machine and all the copies on my machine appear to display correctly. So I'm fairly confident that its the upload onto wikipedia and/or wiki-format that is wrong.Pyrotec 10:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canals

Project suggestion. Do you intend to compile Canal mileages and lock depths? ShakespeareFan00 09:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not actually the originator of the canal mapping effort, although I have added a few icons and one big map (BCN Main Line) and a much smaller one. I don't have any relevent canal maps that show distances or depths but the mapping templates have room for this if known. They are based on railway map templates which have been extensively used on the English, and originally, German Wikipedias. Oosoom Talk to me 09:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KES

Hello, i would like to ask a question or favour. Do you happen to have any free use images of King Edwards Birmingham from when it was at New Street. I ask because i am trying to update the article and an image would be most helpful and i ask you because of you various image contributions in the past, in particular the old KEHS picture. Thankyou Woodym555 18:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have loaded two imaged from an 1894 book onto Commons: Image:KES Free Grammar School original without tower.jpg and Image:KES Free Grammar School Charles Barry.jpg. Oosoom Talk to me 20:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant, exactly what i was looking for. Thankyou. I have added them into the article and i will expand some of the other sections in the coming days. Thanks again. Woodym555 22:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images

You may or may not be aware that your images of the canals are being used here without any credit to you being the photographer. I thought I should raise it to your attention. - Erebus555 16:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Well spotted. I must check the licencing I put on them. Oosoom Talk to me 21:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Nine GFDL images used without credit. I've emailed the webmaster. Thanks. Oosoom Talk to me 08:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I thought I had seen those pictures before somewhere :) - Erebus555 11:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TameValley Canal - Green Lane footbridge

Your TVC map looks good - you might like to add the Green Lane footbridge (map), between the Hamstead Wharf and A4041. It's well worth a visit, to view the steep-sided and heavily wooded valley, below; and quite impressive viewed from below. Access from the former to latter is most easily done via the unadvertised path down from the A4041, north-west side (if driving, park in a side street). Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:36, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Done. OS detail map from 1901 shows a canal basin to east of footbridge and wharf to the west and at the footbridge near the pier. The Pier is marked on the map with no further explanation. It actually resembles the canal footings of a bridge pier (in size and style), but with no indication of any track to it, although it could have been, or intended to be, a branch off the tramway to Hamstead Colliery. Oosoom Talk to me 11:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting; is that map on-line? Also, don't forget Perry Reservoir. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is Perry Reservoir part of the canal network? - it is below the canal level. Oosoom Talk to me 18:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yup/ Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 18:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OS map of Hamstead Colliery and Wharf now on Commons here: Image:Hamstead Colliery 50pc.jpg. Oosoom Talk to me 20:39, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're very kind, thank you. It's absolutely fascinating - I know the area well - to compare the map and the current aerial views on Google. Hardly anything remains, though you can make out the mouth of the basin. I wonder if the people who live there now, know what went on under their floors? Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 20:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing - the M6 doesn't cross the canal near Rushall Junction; see this map. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. :) Oosoom Talk to me 18:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BCN coordinates

Great work! They look really good, laid over Google maps using the coordinates link. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 12:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was so relieved to finish the checking that I didn't realise I'd left off the OS coordinbates - to follow eventually. Thanks for the reference for the Smethwick coal chutes. Unfortunately they were demolished earlier this year, before I knew about them. Oosoom Talk to me 13:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IoE template

You say on your user page "and default 2nd parameter as qualifying suffix". Could you explain - or point me to where I can find any documentation about this? Thanks. PamD 08:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The second parameter, if specified, can be used to add additional text to the description of the link, preferably starting with a hyphen and space, which is useful if there are several listed objects in an article. eg:

*{{IoE|216781}}

expanding to:

  • Historic England. "Details from listed building database ({{{num}}})". National Heritage List for England.

*{{IoE|216781|- gateway (Grade II)}}

expanding to:

Good luck. Oosoom Talk to me 09:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Documentation added to template Talk page. Oosoom Talk to me 09:18, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. See Temple Newsam! PamD 09:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canal Icons

I noticed you were uploading the Canal description icons directly to Wikipedia. Wouldn't it make more sense to upload them to the Commons, as is done with the route diagram icons? They are free after all, and other Wikipedias could use them.--Max Talk (+) 17:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. A much better location, although more with effort and complexity. Also less easy to keep track of comments or changes unless you log on to Commons regularly. Perhaps we should be encouraged to move them all - they are split between locations. However use of Commons requires a lot more effort and discipline, not to mention the somewhat unfamiliar and evolving upload dialogues and copyright licencing and categories. Oosoom Talk to me 09:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion about the appropriateness or otherwise of some links that have been added to a number of pages, and subsequently removed. As you are a member of the project, you may wish to comment at

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Waterways#Pennine Waterways Links

Mayalld 14:32, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oosoom&oldid=157617368"