User talk:Paul W/Archive 5

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

DYK nomination of Alexander Duckham

Hello! Your submission of Alexander Duckham at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Amgisseman(BYU) (talk) 22:07, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Alexander Duckham

On 26 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Alexander Duckham, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Alexander Duckham, founder of Alexander Duckham & Co, was a friend of cross-channel aviator Louis Blériot, and paid for the memorial marking where Blériot landed in 1909? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Alexander Duckham. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Alexander Duckham), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 17:06, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

New article about mobile learning platform

Hey Paul, I am the CMO at SoloLearn - the largest community of mobile code learners. I saw you are interested to write about businesses and IT companies and thought SoloLearn could be of your interest. It features a new and unique way to learn coding on mobile and has quietly grown its popularity among millennials reaching 11M learners globally - https://techcrunch.com/tag/sololearn/. Will be happy to have your opinion on what we are doing in any case. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArminaM (talk • contribs) 13:39, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

English football sexual abuse scandal

Just wanted to congratulate you on single-handedly covering this vital topic and doing it so well. I hope you don't mind but I've nominated it at ITN for main page inclusion under "ongoing". It's not likely to succeed as many of the voters there aren't even really sure what "football" means, but I thought it was worth a try. Keep up the great work. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:51, 4 December 2016 (UTC):

Thanks User:The Rambling Man. Nice to be appreciated - so many of our niche endeavours go 'under the radar'. Paul W (talk) 20:00, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Indeed, although sometimes that's a good place to remain, sticking your head above the parapit around here can often lead to dreary migraines relating to ignorance or Arbcom...! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:02, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
I think it needs expanding (beyond English football) and moving now, especially in light of this.... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks User:The Rambling Man. I have used the article Talk page to suggest the article be renamed. UK, maybe? Paul W (talk) 21:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

ITN recognition for English football sexual abuse scandal

On 7 December 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article English football sexual abuse scandal, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Malta allegations

Hi there Paul. I edit the part on the article United_Kingdom football sexual abuse scandal#Bob Higgins to give some background and context of Higgins, something which was on Maltese news since the late 1980s, late 1990s and again in 2016. The edit was in good faith and even though it relates to Malta in an article related to the UK, I think it is contextual - as apparently he flew to get a jon in Malta when allegations against him in the UK were being investigated, and managed to avoid severe questioning to British authorities. I did not went into details as I only included what the source said. What was the exact reason for the removal of content?Continentaleurope (talk) 15:52, 12 December 2016 (UTC) Continentaleurope (talk) 15:52, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Prior to your addition, the article already included links to Malta and the Malta FA in the sub-section below, so I consolidated your useful addition into that, retaining the citation and the additional information from the source. However, some points - for example, about apparent contraventions of Maltese laws - were not made in the BBC article. If you have other Maltese references that cover this, or relate to Higgins's conduct in the past, it would be good to have them. Best wishes. Paul W (talk) 16:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Half Barnstar
Thanks for your input. Annie Leigh Browne looks much better and its tweeted here. Interested in a Women in Red event at Cambridge Uni in March? Anyway - thanks Victuallers (talk) 17:17, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Oooh! Thank you. Really interesting woman and your article stimulated me to tackle a couple of other red links: Eva McLaren and Mary Stewart Kilgour (which is still a bit stub-by, as I don't have ODNB access at the mo). Might be interested in Cambridge (I am a Wikimedia UK volunteer and trainer), but it will depend on the dates. Paul W (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Amy Richlin

On 5 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Amy Richlin, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Amy Richlin teaches ancient sex? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Amy Richlin. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Amy Richlin), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:52, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Fulham Refuge

On 17 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fulham Refuge, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Fulham Refuge was the "most distinctively feminine of the early convict prisons"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fulham Refuge. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Fulham Refuge), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Copyright problem on J & E Hall

Material you included in the above article appears to have been copied from the copyright web page http://www.dartfordarchive.org.uk/20th_century/industry_halls.shtml. Your initial addition at 14:37 on May 22 was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright violation. I see you did some paraphrasing of the content since then, and I have done some more paraphrasing to clean the content further. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:19, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Also, it appears that you copied some text from Richard Trevithick into the article. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, like I did here. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:28, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Diannaa. Have left an acknowledgement on your talk page. Paul W (talk) 11:30, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Bell Pottinger

I'm trying to get a handle on what's going on at that article. You are welcome to join conversation at WP:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Bell Pottinger. - Bri (talk) 21:43, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

While I am mindful of WP:AGF, you have disclosed that you are a PR practitioner in London. Although I am supportive of your edits, and was going to request protection for the page myself because of the vandalism, I would like you to please confirm that you have no personal or professional ties to Bell Pottinger and its staff.Park3r (talk) 10:32, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

I can confirm I have no personal or professional ties to Bell Pottinger or any of its staff. I have, of course, read about them frequently in national and trade media, and have made past edits to the Bell Pottinger article based on those sources. For what it's worth, I work predominantly in business-to-business PR in the construction technology sector (a small niche area well outside Bell Pottinger's client interests), and to the best of my knowledge have never engaged with any Bell Pottinger people. Paul W (talk) 10:45, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Park3r (talk) 10:46, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Massey Shaw and other LFB Chief Officers.

Excellent job on the Eyre Massey Shaw merger and update. Impressed Paul W. As you may have gather over my paygrade but there are at two other former LFB Chief Officers worthy of similar treatment if you are interested. Happy to supply all necessary bachground material. One is Arthur Dyer 1918-1933, the other is Major C.C.B. Morris. MC. (RetiredLFB (talk) 21:09, 14 July 2017 (UTC)).

Thanks RetiredLFB. Happy to collaborate on further articles if we can establish their notability. If you start an article in your Sandbox, let me know and we can work on it to get it into a publishable state. Best wishes User:Paul W (talk) 11:07, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Many thank for your message dated Sept re Leslie Leete. Delighted if you would add what you have. I have a handle on doing the odd edit but starting from scratch is clearly above my pay=grade at present. But given time it can only get better. Thanks Dave Pike-Retired LFB.

Social Housing in the UK WikiProject

Hi Paul, I notice that you edited the Brandon Estate article I created yesterday. I've also started a Wikiproject, Wikipedia:WikiProject Social Housing in the United Kingdom to organise some of the work of creating articles on estates. Perhaps you'd like to help with it? Wikimedia UK would eventually like to run an event with interested people to improve this content, so please feel free to contact me if you would be interested to help out with the project - john.lubbock@wikimedia.org.uk - Thanks! Jwslubbock (talk) 12:23, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks John. I lived on the Brandon Estate for a couple of years in the early 1990s. Might well be interested in an event on this area. Paul W (talk) 16:14, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Leslie Leete has been accepted

Leslie Leete, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DavidWestT (talk) 16:01, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

COI edit question

Hi, I'm having a bit of difficulty with your disclosures - especially considering you stated some are under NDA. Could you help me with something? Is the recent editing on/about Bell Pottinger such as this and this representing a client? ☆ Bri (talk) 16:43, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

The edits have no relation to any client of mine, and I have no involvement with Bell Pottinger or any of its competitors. I have been editing the Bell Pottinger article since its first Wikipedia edits became news some years ago, reflecting my general interest in public relations and in ethical editing of Wikipedia. Please let me know if you need any further information. Paul W (talk) 17:39, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Paul W. 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)

ITN recognition for Carillion

On 15 January 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Carillion, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 22:31, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Great work on improving Carillion and the biographies of it directors. Edwardx (talk) 12:58, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Agreed: great job! Dormskirk (talk) 13:31, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Interdisciplinary Design for the Built Environment

Hello Paul. I am not a regular wikipedia contributor but have had a fair amount of involvement in construction industry improvement initiatives for about 30 years or so. I appreciate this is a topic area where you are knowledgeable and I know you have contributed extensively to wikipedia. In the last few days, this has included the Construction Research and Innovation Strategy Panel page which I started, and I added slightly to your page on Richard Saxon, whom I know quite well. In addition to contributing to the work of CRISP, over the years I have written material for the old Energy Efficiency Best Practice programme later Action Energy (guides and case studies), the Construction Best Practice programmme and (as it became) Constructing Excellence (guides), the IT Construction Best Practice programme (case studies), CABE (The Value Handbook etc), the Strategic Forum (unpublished synopsis of Accelerating Change), and the SEC Group ('Sustainable buildings need integrated teams'). Through a series of happy coincidences I became the Course Director of the Interdisciplinary Design for the Built Environment (IDBE) masters course at Cambridge, which I did for over 10 years. The course was almost closed down in 2017, corresponding with my retirement as Director. The course drew on a range of ideas and inputs from industry experts but also my experience of these improvement initiatives. You will appreciate that I was keen to ensure its legacy and created a wikipedia page about a year ago. Unfortunately in my ignorance, I included the acronym IDBE in the page title and someone (perhaps you? can't remember) changed it. As I'd already created a few links which were lost, I changed it back, completely the wrong thing to have done. Then, inevitably, someone added the conflict of interest template, and then it was deleted. Someone else then re-created it, but again there were proposals to delete it, and it was deleted quite quickly, with a redirect to the Institute which took it over from 2017. No doubt there is an appeal process but I don't know enough about wikipedia even to start. I can't now see the page history, but I think you said at the time something to the effect that we don't need a page for every course. That may or may not be right (other courses are featured in wikipedia) but the IDBE course (IMHO) has got to be a leading course and is a way of delivering and promoting the very industry reforms (Latham, Egan, Morrell, Saxon etc) that you've written about. I myself have a healthy skepticism about fake claims, but at the same time I can't help feeling that we in the industry are quick to beat ourselves up, when we should be doing the opposite - we should be pulling together and promoting our successes. IDBE is part of that success story of industry improvement. I wonder if I could ask whether you would feel inclined to revise your view about the IDBE page? If so, is there some way it could be brought back without the re-direct. Or, have you any other suggestions? Sebastian Macmillan (talk) 09:50, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughtful reply on my talk page. I've contributed to a handful of Wikipedia entries - and only ones where I have genuine enthusiasm for the topic and can perhaps bring a unique or at least insightful perspective. I had never looked at WP:Schooloutcomes until now. Naively I had wanted to believe that Wikipedia could be contributed to by anyone and aimed to be, in your words, 'complete, neutral, balanced, accurate and reliably sourced as possible.' That ambition seems to me in some contrast to the censorship implied in the AfD page. Regardless of my own contributions including the IDBE page, I am bemused that editors pop up and on the basis of their own judgment delete or propose for deletion someone else's hard-won wikipedia entry. Understandable if the entry is commercially-biased, self-promotional, deluded or factually incorrect as per WP:Soap but harder to understand when, whatever the topic, it is neutral, balanced, accurate and reliably sourced. C'est la vie. Sebastian Macmillan (talk) 11:59, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for the copyediting—thirsty work! —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap shit room 13:34, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Err—unfortunately I was expanding the lede at the time, and when I saved it (no edit conflict, bizarrely) I seem to have manage to erased all your copy-edits. Sorry about that. If you want to hang back for a few minutes, I'll fill em in again. Thanks again! —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap shit room 13:36, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll sit back for a while now.... Paul W (talk) 13:43, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
No problem, I think I caught all your edits if you'd like to double-check...also removed the "In use" again!!  :) Cheers, —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap shit room 14:03, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Event coordinator granted

After reviewing your request for the "eventcoordinator" permission, I have enabled the flag on your account. Keep in mind these things:

  • The event coordinator right removes the limit on the maximum number of new accounts that can be created in a 24-hour period.
  • The event coordinator right allows you to temporarily add the "confirmed" permission to newly created accounts. You should not grant this for more than 10 days.
  • The event coordinator right is not a status symbol. If it remains unused, it is likely to be removed. Abuse of the event coordinator right will result in its removal by an administrator.
  • Please note, if you were previously a member of the "account creator" group, your flag may have been converted to this new group.

If you no longer require the right, let me know, or ask any other administrator. Drop a note on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of the event coordinator right. Happy editing! — xaosflux Talk 19:15, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Barlow article.

A section of factual text was removed without reason. Can you explain why?

"It is important to note that whilst Barlow held one patent and one pending, he never actually built any of his own shields. It is a matter of public record that James Henry Greathead (Barlow's pupil), independently designed, patented and built the first cylindrical tunnelling shield used to build the Tower Subway tunnel; only the second tunnel under the Thames. Barlow was the engineer with Greathead as the contractor according to W. C. Copperthwaite in his 1906 book on subaqueous tunnelling. Whilst Greathead built the first European tunnelling shield, Alfred Ely Beach designed and built his own design of shield in New York which closely resembled Barlow's 1864 idea but again, independently. All the of these men were well acquainted with the Brunels' rectangular shield patent of 1818 and each improved upon the rectangular design in their respective ways that in 1869 both Greathead and Beach were the first people to build a cylindrical design for tunnelling shields." Ashattock (talk) 10:13, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Left message on your Talk page: The text was not "removed" from the Peter W. Barlow article, just moved. I felt it was better embedded in the relevant section of the main body of the article rather than in the lead (as per WP:lead). Paul W (talk) 12:30, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Paul W. 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)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kate Garbers has been accepted

Kate Garbers, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 23:59, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kate Garbers

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Kate Garbers, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Praxidicae (talk) 00:35, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Kate Garbers for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kate Garbers is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kate Garbers until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bradv🍁 15:16, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your efforts in putting this article together. As I'm sure you're aware, the standards for notability refer to the subject of the article, not the quality of the writing. I would love to be able to fix the article up and keep it, but I'm just not finding the in-depth coverage required to do so. The AfD will be open for a week, so perhaps someone else can find something. Either way, thank you. Bradv🍁 15:54, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Renew Party logo.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:02, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Paul_W/Archive_5&oldid=952266655"