Welcome to my talk page. I'm new to all this Wikipedia stuff, but am very keen to learn how to do a proper job with it. Please feel free to tell me what you think to any of my entries (I've got a thick skin, and don't mind constructive criticsm).

Sammy_r (talk) 14:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Sam.roebuck, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place ((helpme)) before the question. Again, welcome!

I've seen the articles you've been creating, and maybe you should slow down- there doesn't seem to be a point in having identical articles for every individual milecastle. ALI ^{nom nom} 13:25, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's method to my madness - Have a quick look at the Milecastle 10 talk page to see the reasons for the placeholder text. That said, I haven't any massive emotional attachment to it staying.Sammy_r (talk) 13:36, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did, and I'm removing the tags now. But is there historical information for each milecastle? Or would they look better arranged in a list page, with comments for each milecastle, if any? ALI ^{nom nom} 13:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have a quick look at Milecastle 9 as an example of how they're going to look when they're finished.Sammy_r (talk) 13:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am humbled. I'm actually interested in this project. I won't have a lot of free time for a while, but let me know what I can do to help. ALI ^{nom nom} 13:45, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Always happy to have someone else on board. 81 milecasltles is a fair few to get through - and then I'm hoping to do the Milefortlets along the Cumbria coast, just to complete the picture. Now, I think I'm being a little naïve here. I was going to send you an e-mail with the details, but I'm sure the 'Contact this user' facility has disappeared. I've never used it before, but I always felt happy that i knew where it was if i needed to.Sammy_r (talk) 14:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Though you can theoretically e-mail me using the function on my user page, I have tried multiple times to confirm it and have no idea how I've been doing it wrong. So it current doesn't work, but I can try to re-confirm it tonight. Are you sure you want to e-mail people, or could all the information be put in some common userspace? ALI ^{nom nom} 19:24, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem either way. It was really just to say that we've been using www.pastscape.org as a basis, and supplementing with (primarily) the latest Handbook to the Roman Wall. I also have a copy of 'Hadrian's Wall', which is less specific. Here's where the e-mail comes in - I'm happy to scan any relevant pages and send them to you. Perhaps you could have a crack at MC80 some time and work your way back? Thanks for the offer of help - anything you can do is a bonus. By the way, don't trust pastscape absolutely. It's not bad, but sometimes you get the impression that it was written by someone who was weary of the research and wasn't always as thorough as they could have been. That's not to knock it. 99% of the time it's truly top notch-Sammy_r (talk) 20:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, good to know, thanks. And e-mail is working now. ALI ^{nom nom} 21:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think there is benefit in creating redirects for the turrets, e.g. [1]? By the way, I got your email and will be replying soon! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't got an axe to grind either way at the moment. The thinking was initially to accomodate the Leahill Turret article (which already existed). And I thought similar things could be done for the other three significant turrets (Denton, Brunton and Peel Gap.) Since then, Dumelow has done some sterling work on Milecastle 7, and incorporated some good stuff on Denton Turret (I only found this last night, after I sent an e-mail to you), and so probably no longer worth a page on its own. He has also added Peel Gap Tower as an 'other' structure on the Template (archaeologically, I can't argue against it) and so that probably does rate its own page. At the end of the day, all the information is present and accessible so . . . . comments welcome.-Sammy_r (talk) 10:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam. Thanks for taking a look over the Pike Hill Signal Tower article! Just a quick point: I was just wondering whether the large Roman Military History template on the right hand side was really applicable to this page? It seems to me that 'banner' articles such as Hadrian's Wall should carry the template, but that perhaps it is a bit overbearing on the smaller sub-articles which essentially cascade down from the 'banner' article? If it was collapsible that would be ok but I think with it being so large it almost overwhelms the rest of the article! Let me know your thoughts. I'll also try and get around to looking at the Milecastle articles but unfortunately my work here is slow and somewhat erratic! Thanks again. Nick Ottery (talk) 17:00, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do see your point. I put it on the milecastle template not to add value, but for visual reasons (to try and make them look 'longer' - I have a wide screen, and shorter articles tend to look very wide and short without something to squeeze them up.) Seriously, from my point of view, feel free to be rid of it - I know it's not a very 'Wiki' thing to say, but I see it as 'your' article. And thanks for the offer of help. I know what it's like. I've only recently come to Wikipedia and there's so many articles I want to write, on top of never having time to do what I needed to do in 'real' life.-Sammy_r (talk) 17:50, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response. I can also see where you are coming from but I think that for the moment I'll remove it from the article and drop a quick note on the talk page. It looks like you are doing a brilliant job with the Milecastle articles - I'll try and help out when and where I can! Thanks. Nick Ottery (talk) 18:46, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Sam.roebuck, I see you're up for adoption, and I'm in the market. If ever you need advice or answers, just ask me -- any question, any time. I'd like to help however I can. Happy editing - Draeco (talk) 19:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On June 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Milecastle 9, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 13:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC) 06:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If we had not deleted File:1. South Shields Map.jpg for incorrect licence, we would have deleted it as a blatant copyright violation from the OS. Maps are accessed via the ((coord)) or ((gbmapping)) templates, we do not normally upload them.

Uploading File:Downhill Quarry (disused).jpg was perfectly legal, but you should have uploaded it to the Commons, preferably using Magnus' tool. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:07, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies - South Shields map was uploaded in error, and once uploaded, I had no idea how to delete it. It seemed that it was going to be deleted anyway, so I let nature take its course. I have uploaded several pictures from geograph.org.uk by merely (I thought) following their instructions. I've never heard of Magnus' Tool, but I'll certainly have a look at it if it makes life easier. Cheers. Sammy_r (talk) 14:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Gladiatrix (novel). When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Top Jim (talk) 15:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Gladiatrix (novel) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability per WP:Notability (books), unreferenced, no significant coverage of book online from WP: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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Top Jim (talk) 15:46, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion has begun about whether the article Gladiatrix (novel), which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gladiatrix (novel) until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Top Jim (talk) 15:57, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Gladiatrix Front Cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:37, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sam, glad to see you are back and editing Hadrian's Wall articles again.

I have also been taking a bit of a break but was taking a look through my old sandboxes earlier today (and making some new articles) and came across one I was working on for MC18 (here). I then noticed you were posting some more milecastles and that you had started on MC18. If you like I will take a look at this one later today and try to post something up from my sandbox (as I already have much of the research in there). Hope that helps - Dumelow (talk) 14:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Rob (was it Rob? Can't remember. Sorry). Yes, I got bogged down in MC26, and never seemed to recover. I don't know why, but I felt motivated to start again. Yes, please do MC18 (and MC19 if you get the chance). I'm going to plough on with 28 etc., until I feel demotivated again. Cheers and have a good weekend.Sammy_r (talk) 15:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it was Rob. I have been fairly inactive recently due to work etc. but am starting to get a bit more time for editing again. I will finish 18 and then take a look at 19 & 20 over the next couple of weeks (hopefully!) and then maybe attack the rest of the list. Nice to speak with you again - Dumelow (talk) 15:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And 20, yes please. If you need any scans of the Handbook to the Roman Wall, let me know. Nice to speak with you again.Sammy_r (talk) 15:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, 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.

Milecastle 29 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Constantine and John Horsley

Milecastle 27 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Principia

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Another editor nominated Limestone Corner for DYK, and I just reviewed the nomination. It appears to meet almost all DYK criteria, but the few concerns I noted probably can be addressed only by you, not by the editor who nominated the article, so I'm leaving this message to let you know about it. Please comment at the nomination page when you can. SJ Morg (talk) 11:13, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 March 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Limestone Corner, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Limestone Corner area of Hadrian's Wall is not made from limestone? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Limestone Corner.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:07, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Milecastle 34, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mortar (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) 10:08, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Turret (Hadrian's Wall), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mortar (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) 11:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you have finished with User:Sam.roebuck/Template:Roman visitor sites in the UK, please tag it with ((db-author)). In fact, please have a look through Special:PrefixIndex/User:Sam.roebuck and do the same with any other stale drafts. – Fayenatic London 13:10, 27 August 2012 (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) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sam.roebuck. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Hello, Sam.roebuck. 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)[reply]

Template:Hadrian's Wall forts has been nominated for merging with Template:Milecastles. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 19:34, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]