User talk:Owain

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3
• Archive 4
• Archive 5
• Archive 6
• Archive 7
• Archive 8

---

Your article name change seems very sensible and less cumbersome. But I see that you have also changed "of" to "in". In fact, it's not in at all, but of the citizens of i.e. anywhere in the world. I suppose it depends what you mean by "in", but I always thought that the previous name was a bit of a misnomer. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:49, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

II did ponder of the switch from "of" to "in", but there is no real way of conveying the full meaning without something equally cumbersome like "List of disasters in, or concerning the citizens of, Great Britain and ireland"! Owain (talk) 15:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Yes, it might be tricky. I'm sure we don't really want Great British Disasters, do we? It's not a big issue for me. But given that some article name changes can genearate huge discussions and then even extended RfCs, I suspect this one may draw some comment. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Pursuivant's Barnstar
		Ok, so it's more about Heraldry than Vexillology, but you deserve some credit for so eloquently defending the integrity of the Flag Institute. Cheers! Achowat (talk) 13:58, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate, I noticed you changed a few cup final articles to remove the Welsh flag from Cardiff City. In actual fact, Cardiff City is not registered with the Football Association but with the Football Association of Wales. As such, they represent Wales in the FA Cup, as do Swansea, Wrexham, Newport County, Colwyn Bay and Merthyr Tydfil. Therefore, if Cardiff City or any of the others were to win an English competition, they would only be eligible for Europe via special dispensation. It is therefore necessary to add the Welsh flag to these articles to make it clear that Cardiff and the others are Welsh clubs participating in an English competition only by virtue of competing in the English football league system. – PeeJay 12:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know what you mean, but I don't think that is the purpose of the 'association' parameters. Take a look at 2010 Coupe de France Final for example, where it is used to indicate the league division, not the affiliated governing body. Owain (talk) 12:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The "association" parameter is meant to indicate which international association a club is affiliated to. I don't think the use at 2010 Coupe de France Final is appropriate, but using it to indicate that Cardiff et al. are Welsh clubs seems sensible to me. – PeeJay 13:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The only problem is that it doesn't really serve either purpose: It's not indicating the league and because it's not an international cup, it is not needed to indicate the association either. If probably also falls foul of WP:MOSFLAG too. Owain (talk) 15:29, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an international cup, sure, but it does indicate that Cardiff are an exception to the general rule that the FA Cup is for English teams. You are the only person who's seen a problem with it so far. How does it fall foul of WP:MOSFLAG btw? – PeeJay 16:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All adequately explained in the FA Cup article itself IMO. Flags in infoboxes like that are generally frowned upon as distracting and placing undue weight on one aspect which may have little actual relevance. In the case of the FA Cup it is of trivial relevance as it is explicitly allowed in the rules of the competition. MOSFLAG also states that one should not use 'naked' flags without first explaining what the flag stands for. This pretty much rules them out of use in infoboxes. Owain (talk) 16:17, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've been busy! Just out of interest - and in the absence of any explanatory edit summaries, ahem - what is your reasoning? I can see problems. For example, District of Port Talbot was, so far as I know, never called that by anyone. It was officially called "Borough Council of Afan" (or "Afan Borough Council"), and then "Borough Council of Port Talbot" (or "Port Talbot Borough Council"). I could see the merits of calling the article Port Talbot (district), because it was called Port Talbot and it was a district - but the wording "District of Port Talbot" seems to suggest a formal title which is not one that it ever had. Related arguments apply elsewhere. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My rationale is Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography#Boroughs. I think in the case where districts were renamed the title "District of X" is still valid as it was still a district, just perhaps with borough status. Sorry for the terse reply, I'm typing this while on a train! Owain (talk) 15:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I'm not concerned enough about it to do anything, but I may comment at some point if debate starts getting heated. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited 2011–12 Newport County A.F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lincoln (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Owain. As far as I could establish 'on the coal exchange site' would be more correct than 'adjacent to'. Have a look at the Newport talk page discussion. Happy for amendment if you have other knowledge. Cheers.Pwimageglow (talk) 12:16, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The façade in question is definitely that of the Old Post Office, not the Corn Exchange as that had a distinctive clock tower. The new-build office next to it is on the site of the old Corn Exchange. See http://newportpast.com/gallery/photos/php/search.php?search=corn for photographs. Owain (talk) 13:17, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Flag of Glamorgan, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.wikishire.co.uk/wiki/Flag_of_Glamorgan.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 14:58, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Acorn Recruitment has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Has existed for 2 years without any evidence of notability, no coverage in reliable sources

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Valenciano (talk) 10:01, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input just now on England and Wales. Much appreciated. Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 12:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article, Countries of the United Kingdom. I understand why you (Owain) may not like that title - I don't either, especially in relation to Northern Ireland - but I don't see any need to cover that up by using words like "parts" which seem to simply reflect your own POV. If you don't like "countries", try changing the title of that article. Good luck!  :-) Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Parts" my reflect my POV but it is also the statutory term! Owain (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any sources that shed any light on why it is called the West of England Tavern? I know why you think it's relevant to the Monmouthshire (historic)#Ambiguity over Welsh status text, but without any sources commenting on its name and the reasons for it, it seems difficult to justify the inclusion of the image in the article. Perhaps it was because the inn's owners wanted to pay tribute to the port's trading links with foreign parts (?!) Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(TPS) Good to see it get such a good press: [1]. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:53, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I deliberately placed the picture next to the section on extending closing pubs on a Sunday to Monmouthshire. I haven't attempted to attribute the name to anything as it is notoriously hard to track down the origin of historic pub names. I imagine in 1838 there was no real "Ambiguity over Welsh status" anyway! Owain (talk) 08:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There must be some books about Newport history that say something about it - it would be interesting to know the background. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:01, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, and I probably have most of them! newportpast.com is quite good too, especially their gallery section which is fascinating. Owain (talk) 09:14, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great site, thank you. I particularly like the entry for 19 November 1836! Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2012–13 Newport County A.F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Braintree (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Area code 01633, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Daicaregos (talk) 07:43, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mais oui! (talk · contribs) has yet again re-added Category:Universities and colleges by country [2]. I'll probably be falsely accused of vandalism (and worse) if I revert him like he alleges here. I welcome your thoughts. Tim! (talk) 19:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts are the same as yours and in line with the guidelines! I have removed the offending categorisation. Owain (talk) 08:46, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Owain, and thank you for your contributions!

An article you worked on Flag of Cumberland, appears to be directly copied from http://www.wikishire.co.uk/wiki/Flag_of_Cumberland. Please take a minute to make sure that the text is freely licensed and properly attributed as a reference, otherwise the article may be deleted.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on Flag of Cumberland if necessary. MadmanBot (talk) 12:51, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When you removed MadmanBot's tag, you said "Wikishire is freely licensed". I've looked but have been unable to find a license or copyright statement of any sort on that site. Could you please point me in the right direction? VernoWhitney (talk) 00:34, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd previously blanked this page pending an answer to my question above. Somehow, I don't think you creating a page on that wiki today and creating a sort of ex post facto contract situation with the contributors there now makes the earlier content acceptable here, but I'm going to ask for some further input. VernoWhitney (talk) 01:07, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am an administrator there and have contributed to a lot of the articles. I can assure you that the content is freely licensable, it is just that the page stating so didn't exist. Feel free to contact the Wikishire administrators directly and you will get the same response. Owain (talk) 09:28, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First,and unrelatedly I'd like to apologize for the rollback on your page a little bit ago. I'm browsing from a phone right now and it's a bit touchy.

Now back to the point at hand, I don't doubt the intent to make it freely licensable before now, I just question whether adjusting the terms of use now can actually affect the copyright status of material already contributed there by other editors before there was such a notice. I could be wrong, of cour I se. I've asked for more opinions at WT:CP. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:06, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your temporal point, and can see how it could be a problem. However, I know the editors in question personally and their intention is obviously to get the information about the flag's registration out in the public domain as quickly as possible. Their vehicle is Wikishire and as that site grows and develops there will obviously be questions as to its policies and its articles' copyright status. The collaborative nature of Wikis does tend to imply free licensing, but I concede that this may need spelling out, even if it is retrospective. Owain (talk) 21:09, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case you missed it, please see Template talk:Cardiff, Newport and the Valleys railway stations#Sources for Valley Lines. Simply south...... walking into bells for just 6 years 16:33, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious about your series of edits (including this, which removed “elements not specific to Wales”) to infoboxes. Why did you leave the parameters: Monarch; Prime Minister of the United Kingdom; and Legislature (UK Parliament)? Anyone who didn't know better would think you were trying to make a point. Daicaregos (talk) 12:55, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to remove them yourself, you've been following Talk:Northern Ireland yourself. Owain (talk) 13:37, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Those parameters (Monarch; Prime Minister of the United Kingdom; and Legislature (UK Parliament)) are not currently being discussed at Talk:Northern Ireland. I can only assume you are referring to the discussion about .ie, which has yet to achieve a consensus. As you are aware of this too, why did you make those changes without either having participated in the discussion, or before its conclusion? Nevertheless, you appear to have avoided answering my initial question. What was your rationale for deleting elements not specific to Wales, yet allowing the parameters: Monarch; Prime Minister of the United Kingdom; and Legislature (UK Parliament) to remain, none of which are specific to Wales? Daicaregos (talk) 14:21, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The .ie discussion was going around in circles. I was bold. There is no agenda on my part, and as I've already stated, feel free to remove any additional parameters that are non-specific to the different parts of the UK. This is a collaboratively-edited project after all. Owain (talk) 14:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be editing articles on the basis that you think that Template:Infobox country should not be used for the countries of the United Kingdom, because they are not sovereign states. If that's the case, it would be probably be better to start a discussion on a central talk page like the one for that template, rather than making bold but somewhat provocative edits on individual articles. In the mean time, I'll revert your edits if it hasn't been done already. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:59, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per Ghmyrtle's comment if you feel strongly about this then raise the subject on one talk page or a central area. WP:BRD is pretty clear and this foes look a bit like an attempt to influence the debate on Northern Ireland ----Snowded ^TALK 15:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The .us ccTLD has specific second level domains for states. For example .ny.us or ca.us. There does seem to be a crusade underway by one particular editor to have .ie removed from the NI page and you may well have stumbled into this mess. Jmccormac (talk) 15:31, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, it's the use of Template:Infobox country that has caused this mess because editors feel the need to fill in every field. The Regions of France, States of Germany, &c. all have their own infoboxes, so why can't the Parts of the UK? Owain (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In part 'cause they are countries ----Snowded ^TALK 16:26, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple previous discussions have concluded that the term "country" is not necessarily synonymous with "sovereign state", and anyway the template covers territories as well as countries. As we all know, the "parts" of the UK each have their own constitutional and other peculiarities - much more so than US states or German Länder - and so it wouldn't be possible (or, at least, it would be very difficult and contentious) to try and design a new template that accommodated all those peculiarities. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:53, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy Owain . I happen to agree with you about Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland & England & therefore personally support your edits. However, you must respect BRD & built a consensus for your proposed changes :) GoodDay (talk) 20:15, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2012–13 Newport County A.F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lincoln (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:2012 FA Trophy Final.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 22:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:2012 FA Trophy Final.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 13:42, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Owain, it would be useful if you can explain your edits more fully. Firstly, I cant find a Welsh team in the list of FA Trophy finals before Newport County. Which team did you have in mind ? Secondly you are right the club name derives from the original name and that is covered early in the article. However, this doesn't belong in the Fans section as its a duplication and, with respect, is irrelevant ie very few (especially current fanbase) would even know they were called Newport and Monmouthshire County for the first couple of years of 100 year history. CheersPwimageglow (talk) 17:39, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had a feeling you wouldn't believe me, so I took the trouble of making this earlier. I understand what you mean about original club name not being directly relevant to the "Fans" section, but it does need stating that that is the reason some people follow the club. I admit it is anecdotal, but I know that some non-Newport fans only support the club because of the wider countywide catchment area, so it is relevant. Owain (talk) 22:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah right - I didn't spot Bangor in the list. With respect, I doubt there is a single person that follow the club because of what the club name briefly was nearly 100 years ago. Yes there are fans in Monmouthshire but thats nowt to do with the original name. Cheers, Pwimageglow (talk) 23:32, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But our old friend mais oui! (talk · contribs) is up to his old tricks and is bulk reverting me. Tim! (talk) 20:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. Seems there may be a hidden agenda Scotire (talk) 00:06, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Could you take a look at the changes an IP has made to the Wales entries in that article? At first I thought they were broadly acceptable, but now I'm concerned that both the IP and I have got muddled between the traditional counties' "county towns" and the administrative centres of the current authorities - some of which are now included in the list, but not others. It may be best to revert all the IP's changes, if what existed previously was accurate - but I'm not sure it was. Whatever happens, some form of clarification may be needed as to which definition of "counties" are included in the list, and which are excluded. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:40, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Same question here: what are these edits? 'Monmouthshire (Welsh: Sir Fynwy) is a principal area with the style of 'county'...' !!! 2A00:23C6:9908:CD00:3979:B6F2:EF22:7860 (talk) 08:34, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Principal areas can have different styles, such as "county", "county borough" or "city". They are exactly the same in all other regards. See Local government in Wales#Principal areas of Wales Owain (talk) 08:44, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me Owain, but Colwyn Bay F.C. is one of the six Welsh clubs that plays in English football. Why have you cancelled it? I don't understand this. User: Disgusto 16:25 16 August 16:25 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Disgusto (talk • contribs)

I presume you are referring to the Football League clubs of Wales template? The "Football League" part of the name is significant as it indicates which teams have played in The Football League at some point in their history. I hope The Bay make it at some point in the future but they are currently not and have not yet ever been members of the Football League. If you look at my edit summaries in the history this will become clear! Owain (talk) 14:40, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the soccerdatabase.eu website, which you used on Chris Lilygreen, is a copyvio website and has previously been mass-removed from Wikipedia, and so should not be used. GiantSnowman 20:29, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013–14 Newport County A.F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Barker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Geography Barnstar
		You are hereby awarded the Barnstar of Geography for your tireless work regarding the geography of Great Britain, particularly regarding the British counties, both on Wikipedia and Wikishire.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wikishire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Historic counties. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:22, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Grade I listed buildings in Glamorgan, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Sionk (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Flag of Caithness, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wick. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Scottish civil parish has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ~ Rob^Talk 21:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2015–16 Newport County A.F.C. season

added a link pointing to John Sheridan

2016–17 Newport County A.F.C. season

added a link pointing to Mike Flynn

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Flag of Leicestershire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://britishcountyflags.com/2017/10/19/a-flag-for-leicestershire/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:51, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If the author wants to licence it so it's usable on Wikipedia, the easiest thing to do is post a notice on the blog that the content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Otherwise, there are steps outlined at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for releasing copyrighted materials so they can be used in Wikipedia (and necessarily, everywhere else, by whoever wants to, for whatever they want). WilyD 15:13, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, an email has been to the Wikimedia Commons address, but the page has just been deleted again. The author has previously been put off contributing their own work to Wikipedia because of this trigger-happy deletion. I will get them to add a Creative Commons notice. Owain (talk) 15:17, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, my impression is that licensing through the email OTRS system goes really slowly. Being all volunteers doing whatever we want makes some jobs really slow to get done. WilyD 08:40, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:EnglandSomersetTrad.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2008–09 Newport County A.F.C. season 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/2008–09 Newport County A.F.C. season 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. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 23:56, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1988–89 Newport County A.F.C. season 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/1988–89 Newport County A.F.C. season 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. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1990–91 Newport A.F.C. season 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/1990–91 Newport A.F.C. season 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. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:16, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I realise you're probably frustrated by the deletion of the season articles, but I feel this one can survive through WP:GNG. I've added as much as I can from the newspaper archives I have access to, if you have any other information or sources to add to the article it would help beef it up and increase its chances of survival. Kosack (talk) 09:27, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1991–92 Newport A.F.C. season 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/1991–92 Newport A.F.C. season 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. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 22:43, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2010–11 Newport County A.F.C. season 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/2010–11 Newport County A.F.C. season 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. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:53, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1994–95 Newport A.F.C. season 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/1994–95 Newport A.F.C. season 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. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 14:51, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1995–96 Newport A.F.C. season 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/1995–96 Newport A.F.C. season 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. Spiderone 17:33, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2009–10 Newport County A.F.C. season 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/2009–10 Newport County A.F.C. season 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. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2007–08 Newport County A.F.C. season 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/2007–08 Newport County A.F.C. season 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. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:19, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2006–07 Newport County A.F.C. season 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/2006–07 Newport County A.F.C. season 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. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2005–06 Newport County A.F.C. season 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/2005–06 Newport County A.F.C. season 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. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2004–05 Newport County A.F.C. season 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/2004–05 Newport County A.F.C. season 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. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:21, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article 1931–32 Newport County A.F.C. season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Only one source, fails WP:NSEASONS and WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:52, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article 1913–14 Newport County A.F.C. season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NSEASONS, WP:GNG and only has one source.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article 1914–15 Newport County A.F.C. season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NSEASONS, WP:GNG and only has one source.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:56, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article 1919–20 Newport County A.F.C. season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NSEASONS, WP:GNG and only has one source.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:56, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I saw you emptied several categories by removing the contents from them. If you disagree with the categories' existence, please list them for deletion at WP:CFD rather than empty them out of process. Cheers, Number 57 14:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree with the categories' existence, just that the articles that were within them were not appropriate. Future articles on previous elections to those specific authorities will be appropriate, if and when they are made. Owain (talk) 15:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have reverted my changes. May I ask why? For example, you have now mixed up Carmarthenshire County Council elections with Dyfed County Council elections in the Category:Council elections in Dyfed. How is this helpful? Owain (talk) 15:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The category "Council elections in Dyfed" is not only for Dyfed County Council elections, it's for all council elections that happen within Dyfed, including authorities of the same or lower standing. For example, Category:Council elections in Essex contains election to Essex County Council, the two unitary authorities (Southend and Thurrock) and all the district councils. Number 57 17:10, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is utterly illogical. Essex is a historic county which people recognise. "Dyfed" existed for 22 years and is now only used for the purposes of lieutenancy and shrievalty. It would make more sense to use that category only for Dyfed County Council and its associated district council elections. You currently have Carmarthenshire elections from way before the creation of "Dyfed" and Carmarthenshire elections from long after its abolition. No-one looking for the 1889 Carmarthenshire County Council election or 2017 Carmarthenshire County Council election is going to look in a "Dyfed" category! Furthermore, between 1996 and 2003 the council areas of Caerphilly and Conwy were split between two "preserved counties". How can you categorise Category:Conwy County Borough Council elections and Category:Caerphilly County Borough Council elections this way? Owain (talk) 09:23, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wikishire, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikishire until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I wondered why you had removed the Welsh language version of the name of this building: without an edit summary it is very difficult to understand your thinking. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It never had an official Welsh-language name. There is no citation for it, so I removed it. Owain (talk) 19:57, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It probably did not have an official Welsh language name because it ceased its official role as the Shire Hall in 1974, long before the Welsh Language Act was introduced in 1993. As regards the lack of a citation, in the article on Wales, the Welsh translation is not cited (or not in the first line, anyway), but I don't believe anyone would want to remove it. I don't see that it does any harm to include it given that it seems to be good practice to include a Welsh name in most articles on Welsh places, buildings etc. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I don't want to sound rude, but I frankly don't understand the point in inserting the historic county in an item which has little or no relation with administrative issues or, like in this case, with no reason at all to exist (If I remember well, Manchester hasn't been in Lancashire for half a century or more, and the City of Manchester Stadium was built in 2002 so it never was in Lancashire...). -- SERGIO aka the Black Cat 23:33, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are right -- you don't understand. The historic county is not an administrative area, in the same way that the lieutenancy area is not an administrative area. However, Wikidata is full of the latter, even pretending to be part of an administrative hierarchy. There are three independent areas that could be called 'county' recognised by the Office for National Statistics Index of Place Names for different purposes. They are the county for the purposes of the Local Government Act 1972, the county or area for the purposes of the Lieutenancies Act 1997 and the historic county -- all three of which are current. See the entry for Manchester itself for instance. You will notice that changes to the administrative arrangements (such as the abolition or formation of a county council) do not alter the historic county, as it is purely a geographic area. Lieutenancy arrangements likewise can be altered independently. In summary, the historic county of Lancaster was not affected by the formation of Lancashire County Council in 1889. It was not affected by the subsequent changes in local government between then and now and the existence of a lieutenancy area also has no bearing on it, as all three are current recognised areas by the UK Government. Owain (talk) 08:13, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thus [apart that, if I understood well, the administrative acts of the 1970s established new administrative areas, didn't trasform the old counties] the so called historic county exists for statistic purpose? -- SERGIO aka the Black Cat 07:49, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, except that it was actually the original Local Government Acts of the 1880s that created the new administrative areas in parallel to the historic counties, not the Acts of the 1970s the just amended what was already there. Owain (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is the bot on the loose again? :-) -- Evilninja (talk)

It was decided that we should not have historic county information on a page where there is a lieutenancy area or county council with the same name. That was a tidying-up exercise to remove such references. Owain (talk) 13:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to hold off on changing more infoboxes for places in Yorkshire - see discussion at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/CountyBot.--Mhockey (talk) 19:45, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Owain, your name keeps popping up on my Watchlist, as you add historic counties to the infoboxes of Welsh locations. Thanks for the tireless work to improve our coverage. Laplorfill (talk) 18:41, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Owain, I've been steadily trying to improve many of the articles on districts of Edinburgh. I see you've been adding historic counties to those articles. Thanks for that. Keep up the good work. Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JimmyGuano (talk) 13:20, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Newport City F.C. logo.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 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:29, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article 01633 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines – no sources listed here indicate that this particular code is somehow notable enough to have a separate encyclopaedia entry. See also this discussion.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — kashmīrī ^TALK 16:17, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please stop removing Cumbria from the Westmorland and Furness article. It still exists. Your removing it for no reason and North West England isn't a county but a region which isn't anything to go off of. If this carries on I'll open a discussion about it. Your removing it for no reason and have done a few times. DragonofBatley (talk) 08:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My edit did nothing of the sort. It merely clarified that the two new council areas when taken together form the ceremonial county. They are not "in Cumbria", together they form Cumbria, which is an important distinction. Owain (talk) 09:04, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case, maybe state something like "a unitary authority forming part of Cumbria in North West England"? Not a unitary authority in North West England. It's important to keep it under Cumbria and not just North West England. If you wish to discuss it please do so on talk page and not through edit warring DragonofBatley (talk) 14:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if you think it is important to mention what the Lieutenancy area is in the opening paragraph then go for it. Owain (talk) 14:10, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sionk (talk) 21:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

JMHamo (talk) 21:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I came across the page List of counties of England and Wales in 1964 by highest point that you created. The page is useful and seems complete, however the grouping of England and Wales together here doesn't seem right and so the page needs to be split into the pages List of counteis by highest point in England and List of counties by highest point in Wales. Obviously, Scotland also has counties with highest points (even if using a different source) so it doesn't really make sense to group England and Wales here.

I thought I would make this suggestion to you first. Would you be happy to go ahead with the split, please?

Thanks for your time and best wishes! Titus Gold (talk) 01:25, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was organised that way as it was a list based on administrative areas created by the Local Government Act 1888 which covered England and Wales. Breaking things up constantly into smaller chunks makes things less useful, especially given that the status of Monmouthshire at the time. Ideally the scope should be expanded to cover the whole of Great Britain, not made even smaller. Ideally there should be a single article with table for GB with separate tables for England, Wales and Scotland. Owain (talk) 08:08, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Newport Cricket Club logo.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 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:42, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

Newport West and Islwyn (UK Parliament constituency)

added links pointing to Crumlin, Newbridge, Gaer, Argoed, Penmaen, Blackwood and Graig

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 18:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article M4 motorway Usk bridge has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The subject of the article lacks a preponderance of reliable sources to establish notability. A formerly proposed bridge of the same name has been mentioned in some reliable sources but is unrelated to the subject and should not be taken into account when evaluating notability. Following WP:NBUILDING, this article may be notable but the lack of cultural significance (for example, compare to the Prince of Wales Bridge) diminishes the potential for notability of the article.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Yasslaywikia (talk) 22:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Flag of Morayshire has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where was this supposed copyright infringement supposed to come from? How am I supposed to know of what I am being accused if you do not supply the supposed source and the edit history has been hidden? Owain (talk) 13:52, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Back in October, you copied a paragraph from https://www.northern-scot.co.uk/moray-flag/ and pasted it into the article. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure I paraphrased it, but knock yourself out. I don't really care. Wikipedia has gone to the dogs anyway. Owain (talk) 14:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Newport County crest.png. 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 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Hundreds of Pembrokeshire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]