User talk:Joshurtree

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, you can post to the help desk or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Sam Vimes 15:02, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

TPT

I have just deleted TPT Villages York spur because it looked like a mistake. The content was:

{{TPT Villages|Selby/York spur|{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}}}

For experimenting, you are recommended to create a personal sandbox such as User:Joshurtree/sandbox. -- RHaworth 06:45:56, 2005-08-23 (UTC)

monobook.js

Your monobook.js file is showing in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion ! (You did put {{db-nonsense}} in it at one stage and the system don't seem able to forget.) To avoid the risk of some admin deleting it by accident, try this: move it to user:joshurtree/anothername and then copy and paste it back to monobook.js. -- RHaworth 12:08:56, 2005-08-28 (UTC)

When I said move, I meant move not copy and paste. Try again. RHaworth 12:24:26, 2005-08-28 (UTC)

Sorry. I missed the fact that you still had {{nonsense}} in the js. If you are going to do that you will have to rely on copy and paste to backups. Some of us are perfectly happy to type {{nonsense}} whenever we need to, we don't feel the need for some fancy - what is it - a reserved keystroke? If you are going to keep it, you had better add your page to the exclusions list in the Category:Candidates for speedy deletion category 'header'. (I will shut up now but if you want to fiddle with my edits to Ribble Link, feel free.) -- RHaworth 12:41:00, 2005-08-28 (UTC)

pound

It was actually on my todo list to put a definition of canal pound into pound (disambiguation) (or a separate note. But I will let you do it. Also in Canal lock, perhaps a bit of clarification. I assume pound lock is the correct term but in my vocabulary a pound is the bit (or sometimes very long stretch) between two locks and the bit where the water goes up and down is the chamber. -- RHaworth 12:21:25, 2005-08-28 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Cromwell Cup, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Sheffield

Hi! You've been busy! It seems like every time I come to wikipedia you've made a number of big edits or new articles about the Sheffield area. So I just wanted to say keep up the good work. I've been thinking to try to get featured article status for the Sheffield article for a while now, and I think that your recent edits are definitely a big step on the way there. Thanks, JeremyA (talk) 02:43, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Athletic fielding skills

Hi, Josh -- Just wondered what you meant by the "athletic fielding skills" of baseball in Comparison between cricket and baseball. Throwing is probably the most important skill improved with the glove, but I suppose that could be considered an athletic skill. I emphasize this is just an inquiry. The article could be improved, so it helps to be clear what other people mean, especially as most of us are far more familiar with one sport than the other. I thought there was a possibility the point about athletic fielding might possibly be worked up to help clarify the difference between the sports. John FitzGerald

P.S. I moved this comment up here so as not to interfere with the next two comments.

Thanks for the explanation and the reference. Further hairsplitting could be done, I suppose, but it's not a high priority. I may have some clarification to suggest, but I should go over the entire article first. The reference was very interesting. Given the number of Australian cricketers who've played baseball it's surprising they haven't been working on fielding before. Maybe the lads thought they'd be better off to keep their additional skills to themselves. Unfortunately, cricket batting seems to be too dissimilar from baseball batting for baseball batters to learn from cricketers. John FitzGerald

your work on the Sheffield article

The work you're doing is great, keep it up! Wackymacs 17:13, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks for all your WikiContributions! --FireFox

UK

The UK is not a country. (Anyone suggesting that would be laughed out of a political science lecture.) It is however a state, or a unitary state, the standard nomenclature for such types of states. Please learn your terminology. The article as it stands is a semi-literate, political science joke. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 23:26, 21 October 2005 (UTC) [reply]

Hebrides-geo-stub

Hi - We at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting note you've recently created a new stub category. Did you realise that stub categories should normally be cleared by Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals before creation? That way they can be vetted to check that there are a viable number of stubs (at least 60-100) and that the category does not cross the existing stub hierarchy before the stub is created.

If you can provide any information on why the stub was created, please add a note to entry for the stub at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries giving the reason for it. In addition, if there is any Wikiproject associated with the stub add that information. Thanks.

In the case of this stub, there are definitely enough stubs for the category, so this is not a problem. the problem is, though, that the United kingdom is being split by administrative counties and regions - and the hebrides fall across this hierarchy, with the Outer Hebrides being in the Western Isles Region and the Inner Hebrides being in the Highland Region. This is going to cause major problems with the split of all of scotland's other stubs by region. Grutness...wha? 00:17, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sheffield population size

Where did you get your population figure for Sheffield that you've changed on the England page? According to the ONS [1], the population of the Urban area of Sheffield is 439,866, but you've changed it to 491,417, a difference of 51,551. Your figure doesn't match the ONS data, nor the population of the Metropolitan Borough called Sheffield... I'm all confused! Steven J 17:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Further to the above, see my reply on Talk:England. Basically, although I disagree with the smaller figure for Sheffield, you can't just change Sheffield's population and not the others in a corresponding way! That is going beyond the issue of whether ONS urban subunits can be validly interpreted as "cities", and definitely going into comparing apples and oranges. Morwen - Talk 13:14, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New user box

Hello Joshurtree, Im SWD316. Im giving you the user box for your user page called Template:User Member. It's a user box that says your a member of the AWWDMBJ.... Hope you like it! SWD316 03:36, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Walton Hall

On Template:Trans Pennine Trail (Table Only) there is a link to Walton Hall. Walton Hall is a disambiguation page, which one is the template referring to? Your help is much appreciated.--Commander Keane 11:13, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2006 population figures

Thanks for your message about these. I'm not convinced that they "have proven inacurate" in general. Yes, there are some districts where what is now the projected change 2004/6 is wildly different from the "actual" 2003/4 trend - I see Sheffield is one - but so are the 2003/4 changes often different from 2002/3 (Sheffield again). So past trends may not be a good predictor of the future, and I'm not entirely convinced by the estimates of the past. Cambridge - my patch - consistently shows an increase of 2000-3000 a year, while local measures such as the electoral roll show nothing of the sort.

My real reason for wanting to show the 2006 projections is that they are the figures the government itself is using, for instance in calculating rate support grants. They may be inaccurate but at least they are definitively inaccurate. In a few cases there is quite a significant difference from 2004 - Westminster changes from 230,000 to 248,498. Would you be happy if I put the 2006 figures in articles, but showed the 2004, and perhaps also the 2001 census (which is probably more inaccurate than any of the estimates!) alongside in List of English districts by population?

I have suspended uploads for the moment in the hope we can agree the best way to proceed.--Keith Edkins 13:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I concede. Commencing roll-back to 2004 estimates. Birmingham isn't a million any more!--Keith

Template:Ref

Thank you !!!!! for fixing that vandalism! We were getting tons of complaints on the Help Desk mailing list, and I couldn't see what they were complaining about. That template should really be protected. Zoe (216.234.130.130 19:13, 16 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Superior Wealth Creation

Hi, I understand the info on Superior Wealth Creation is a bit flakey. I am trying to solve that now, but the problem is, that what I have found so far, is that it is most likely the company of a Con man. Trying to abuse the reputation of Andrew Kahr.

First among Newcastles

From what I can see, there are two candidates for the status of "the" Newcastle.

Newcastle, New South Wales is Australia's seventh-largest city. It has a population of 505,369 in its own right and is called Newcastle.
Newcastle upon Tyne is England's 20th-largest city. It has a population of 269,500 - although this rises to 799,000 if you add in three adjacent boroughs with different names. Its name isn't Newcastle, it's Newcastle upon Tyne.

Assuming that it's down to these cities, I'd say that Newcastle, New South Wales is the better candidate for being the redirect from "Newcastle" - mainly because its called Newcastle. So you know, I'm not from Newcastle. Joestella 01:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The local government structure is certainly not relevant in an Australian context, or Sydney (population 4.2 million) could be in for a pretty serious demotion... to 122,000. But yes. The disambiguation page is a good compromise. Joestella 02:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sheffield

Hi! Good idea putting Sheffield up as a fac--even if it doesn't succeed it will let us know how far from it we are. I had thought about doing it myself but as usual I procrastinated until someone else did it. Because of this I finally decided to add a note about the seven hills, as it seems to be at least in part an urban legend. However, I am a little worried about the J.G.Harston article that you found: he quotes Orwell's The Road to Wigan Pier as the earliest reference that he could find to the seven hills, but searching through the online versions of the text I cannot find the quote. JeremyA 17:13, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the message about this that you previously (Dec 22) left on my page. I'm sorry for not replying - it looks like between you writing that and the next time I read wikipedia someone else added a message so when I saw the 'new message' notice I only looked at that diff and missed yours. Anyway, I'm not that great at assembling great prose (my boss is always slagging off my proof-reading), but I have been doing some fact checking to try to ensure that everything in the article is correct and, where possible, sourced. I hope it becomes a FA, I know that you have put a lot of work into the article in recent months. I'm not sure whether I'm allowed to vote as I have a very obvious bias. JeremyA 21:16, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
About the hills... Most of the stuff on J.G.Harston's website seems pretty good. He is a City Councillor and seems to have a good knowledge about the political boundaries/history of the City. In the footnote that I wrote I tried to write it so that the reader realises that this is just his opinion and not the generally accepted version. I have actually tried to do a similar thing with an OS map of the area but I actually got bogged down on the stupidest thing--that is, how to define a hill! As Mr Harston states, it turns out that valleys are much easier to define than hills. JeremyA 21:28, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Some changes I've made and some others that I'm planning: I moved the 'international links' section into the 'Government' section (which I then renamed 'Government and politics'). I have rejigged the transport section, using some of the text that I have previously worked on at Transport in Sheffield to subdivide the section by local vs national/international transport rather than type of transport (I'm not sure that I have the new subheadings exactly right). I'm planning to add some of the more notable events from Sheffield's history into the 'History' section. I've already added something about Egbert and Dore, and I plan to work in Mary Queen of Scots and the Sheffield Flood. I think that it may partially address another criticism to add the George Orwell quotation and talk about the downfall in the 20th century and urban regeneration more recently. Feel free to work on these things too -- I just wanted you to know that I am watching/responding to the comments raised by the FAC. I also added Sheffield to the fac section of the to-do list on the UK wikipedians notice board, and I'm wondering about putting a note on the talk page there asking other UK wikipedians to pitch in and work on the article to help get Sheffield through the fac because I think that with some work we can do it. JeremyA 01:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say that the size is too big a problem yet, but I agree that the article shouldn't get much longer. I think that the expansions that I made to the history section last night can be trimmed a bit--however, my browser crashed after I finished wrote it the first time and I lost everything I had done; by the time I had rewritten it it was late so I decided to call it a day. I've been trying to find some more negative things to say: the crime rate seems to compare favourably with other English cities (see [2] and also [3] compared with, for example, [4], [5], and [6]). I can't find any good references on pollution, but my feeling is that since the clean air regulations pollution is not a significantly greater/lesser problem than it is in other similarly sized cities. I'm thinking of noting in the 'Attractions' section that Sheffield lacks the beautiful old buildings of other cities (in fact I have been thinking to write Buildings and structures in Sheffield for a while, but I have been in two minds whether to just expand Listed buildings in Sheffield into a more general article or to write a totally new article from scratch). Now that we have added a lot of references I am tempted to cut back on the external links. Of the ones that we have at the moment I think that only the Sheffield City Council website (which is actually also linked from the infobox), the BBC website and Sheffield Today are worthwhile--and in fact I don't think that the article would suffer too much if we just deleted the whole external links section. JeremyA 18:29, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Page move

Hey, I saw your comments on Talk:Los Angeles, California and thought you might be interested to know I've put in a formal request for it to be moved to Los Angeles. I think I've listed the arguments in favor, but feel free to add to or refute them and weigh in. Thanks. Jibbajabba 07:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Maps

You've been busy... nice maps! Maybe we should make an infobox to put them in. JeremyA 23:50, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Birley looks good. I'd maybe include the 2001 population of the ward (important as that was the data used to draw the boundaries) and perhaps also the area of the ward. I'm not sure that the councilor names need to be red-linked -- the red-link implies that we would like articles on them, but for me a councilor falls below the bar of notability for inclusion in wikipedia (apart from perhaps the mayor and council leader). JeremyA 02:13, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A minor thing that I just noticed is that the maps have a black frame that gives them a double frame in the infobox--like I say, it's not a big thing so don't change it unless it is easy to do, but I prefer the way the map appears in the infobox on the Sheffield article. JeremyA 02:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed another thing... It might be better if, rather than having fields in the template for 'councilor1', 'councilor2', and 'councilor3', you just had a single field 'councilors' in which the councilors can be listed (do lists work in templates?). The reason for my thinking this is that it looks like you intend the template to be applicable to electoral wards in other cities, and, I may be wrong, but I don't think that all cities use the three councilors per ward model. JeremyA 03:38, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UKWards

I centred the list of councillors--see what you think, I'm not sure whether it's better that way or not. I also discovered that I spelt councillor wrong in all of the ward articles :-( so I have changed it in the text of the template (although not in the code), and I will go through the articles changing it too. JeremyA 22:40, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just assumed that you copied my spelling--I got it wrong on all but two of the pages. The infobox and maps have definitely improved the ward pages (Gleadless Valley is still looking a little bare), although the two templates on Woodhouse and West Ecclesfield are clashing but that is due to lack of content rather than a problem with the templates. Thanks, JeremyA 23:23, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sheffield a FA

For your superb efforts in working towards making Sheffield a featured article, I, JeremyA, award you this *Featured Article Medal*.

I just noticed. Well done! Thanks for the work that you put in to making it happen. JeremyA 15:43, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aladin

Hi Joshurtree, like you too probably, I'm deeply disappointed by the result the general wikipedia community had with the vote on Aladdin. We are both respectable editors with many many edits, and I was wondering if we should go forward to the official arbitration committee and tell them that we are disturbed by the lack of editorial quality in this respect and are planning to leave the project if this issue isn't addressed. What's your take on this? Peter S. 01:19, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Trans Pennine Trail template

This template showed up with the next village having two }} at the end of the name. I edited TPT Villages to remove those two }}. Some templates now show OK, such as Wentworth and Elsecar, but some such as Brampton still have two }} at the end. I can not figure this out. You might think it is odd someone from Australia is worried about this. My father was born in Hoyland Common and retired there after my mother died. I was in Elsecar and Wentworth last August. --Bduke 04:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I cleared my browser cache, all was well. They all work now, so it looks as if my edit to the template was correct. Cheers, --Bduke 06:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sheffield Wikiproject

Hi! Captain scarlet suggested that we start a Sheffield wikiproject. As I think that this is a good idea I have started drafting ideas at User:JeremyA/Sheffield. If you are interested in the idea please add your name to the list and feel free to edit the draft project page. Thanks, JeremyA 15:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As we now have five participants I have moved the draft project pages to Wikipedia:WikiProject Sheffield, you might want to add this page to your watchlist. Thanks, JeremyA 22:27, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sheffield Rules

Please see Talk:Sheffield Rules - re offside and your deletion of text from football Jooler 18:22, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Sheffield Wednesday

Hi Josh,

I notice that you have been doing some quality work on the Sheffield Wednesday pages. Have you considered joining the wikiproject? It would be great to have you on board, we're a bit short of members since it is very new!

Dan1980 19:17, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the WikiProject. Some articles that you might be interested in working on are History of Sheffield Wednesday F.C. (needs expanding especially early and mid 20th century) and Sheffield Wednesday F.C. seasons (lots of missing information which needs to be added). You seem to know quite a bit about the history of football in Sheffield, so I hope you will be able to provide some of the more obscure statistics from the early history. I know that these are big tasks, and I will be trying to pad them out a bit myself, but I think that you might be able to do them more justice! --Dan1980 20:02, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 21 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Zulus, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

-- Grue 17:36, 21 July 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Cornwall

What was wrong with my edit on the Cornwall page?

Duchy is not the official term for Cornwall. This subject has been hammered out repeatedly and all unsubstanciated claims get reverted. FYI the 1972 report you refered to has no offical status. josh (talk) 12:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unsubstantiated? H.R.H. The Prince of Wales is the Duke of Cornwall, he owns and administers the Duchy...it does exist officially.

p.s. I was talking about the Report of the Royal Commission on the Constitution, published in 1973 (known as the Kilbrandon Report)

What you are refering to is covered by Duchy of Cornwall. Its relation to the county has been extensivly debated on the Talk page which has resulted in the current intro. If you want this change then you will have to supply evidence contridicting the status quo but make sure it hasn't already been covered previously (as is the case with the Kilbrandon Report). josh (talk) 14:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"In medieval England, the territories of Lancashire (see Duchy of Lancaster) and Cornwall were made duchies, with certain powers accruing to their Dukes. These duchies today are held by the Royal Family, and have lost their political role."

Image:Sheffield Wednesday F.C. league position.png

Great work with the graph, but it is hard to see the league position when the image is used as a thumbnail. Would it be possible to make the line stand out a bit more, possibly by making the backgrounds fainter and the line darker (or thicker)? Dan1980 07:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

In recognition of your hard work improving the quality of articles relating to Sheffield Wednesday F.C. — Awarded by Dan1980 07:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Calling programmers

We need coders for the WikiProject Disambigation fixer. We need to make a program to make faster and easier the fixing of links. We will be happy if you could check the project. You can Help! --Neo139 09:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New articles on Sheffield Wednesday

Hi Josh,

I see you've been busy creating some more biography pages. Could you please add {{WPSWFC}} to the talk page of any that you create so that they are added to the Category:WikiProject Sheffield Wednesday articles. This makes it loads easier for everyone to keep track of any new articles that are created.

Cheers, Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 20:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One tier

You seem to have mis-interpreted what the one tier proposal is. It literally means only one tier, ie. no "UK", eg:

Truro, Cornwall (that's it, nothing else at all)
Newry, County Down (no mention of Northern Ireland, nor UK)
Forfar, Angus (that is it: no Scotland)

Thanks. --Mais oui! 07:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]