This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Radyr railways
Morning mate. I noticed you amended the edit about the number of passengers at Radyr railway station - I guess I was only looking at the passengers going IN and not going OUT! Anyway, there used to be a statement about 200 trains a day passing through the station - I took this statement out because I couldn't find any sources, but would you have any idea where this info would be? Also, would you know if Radyr really was once the busiest railway station in the world? Bettia(bring on the trumpets!) 10:23, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Well, I guess counting the number of trains in the timetable would be an option! And I imagine it was quite busy in the coal-era because of its position between Cardiff and Valleys, quite possibly on a European scale, feasible on a world scale but Google not come up with anything? Welshleprechaun (talk) 15:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
You are cordially invited to join WikiProject Eurovision!
You appear to be someone that may be interested in joining WikiProject Eurovision. Please accept this formal invitation from a current member of the project.
We offer a place for you to connect with users who also like Eurovision and facilitate team work in the development of Eurovision articles.
We also publish a monthly newsletter that keeps you up to date on project, member, and Eurovision news.
If you decide to join the project, please add your name to this list.
"Article Alerts" are available on our Eurovision project page and show which project related articles are tagged for things such as deletion, GA review, peer review, etc. Take a look and do what you can to help out.
Thanks to Afkatk's recent tagging and assessing spree, there are now over 2,700 articles associated with the project and all are assessed. If you happen to see a Eurovision related article without the ((EurovisionNotice)) template on the article's talk page, please add it. You can also read Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment if you would like to help reassess articles in our project if you see that they have outgrown their current assessment.
F. Y. R. Macedonia is threatening to withdraw from the 2010 Contest with the reasoning that it has come tenth twice in successive years in the semi final stage, but has failed to proceed to the final in both instances.
More than a dozen countries have already confirmed their participation for the 2010 Contest. The countries confirmed so far can be seen here.
Welcome to the tenth edition of the WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter!
This month was a very busy month in terms of editing and adding to Eurovision 2009 articles. The 2009 contest is now over but there is still much work to be done.
Some Country in ESC 2009 pages are yet to have their "At Eurovision" sections updated. Some countries need more information than others, e.g. Slovenia's article needs to mention that the song was actually sung in Slovenian and English, and not just English like in the official mp3, etc.
Work has begun on the 2010 contest article already. Please do not add sections to the article about confirmed participants or withdrawn participants unless you have a source!
That's all from me this month!
Happy editing, Nathan | talk 16:03, 27 May 2009 (UTC).
If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list. This Newsletter was delivered by Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 02:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Swansea monopoly, June 2009
Welshleprechaun, firstly your edit wasn't "more neutral", it was pointless verbiage. As I said on the article talkpage, a locally-known building or structure is just a long-winded way of saying a local landmark - see the dictionary definition of landmark, esp. 2a and 4[1]. Secondly, there is no 'official' list of landmarks in Wales or the UK as a whole - it's simply a matter of opinion which places do or don't merit the description. If the manufacturer of a board game describes certain locations depicted in that game as landmarks, that's up to them.[2] Thirdly, please stop making unreasonable accusations of bias against me - without clear evidence these can be construed as a personal attack. Pondle (talk) 22:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Swansea railway station
I watch Swansea railway station, hence my interest. As for whether major stations en route to a third destination should be mentioned in the narrative, I don't see consistency in other articles - and I notice that you omitted Reading, which is also on the template.Pondle (talk) 22:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Hiya, just noticed on the history of the Cardiff article that you'd reverted one of my image moves. Sorry, I hadn't meant to revert your reversion (if you know what I mean). I had wondered where the Cardiff market image had gone and just assumed that I'd made a mistake and deleted when I should have saved (or something), as I'd made so many changes. My reasoning was that Cardiff Market is representative of economic activity (through the ages) and it is a strong image, whereas, although the the Capital Tower is important in terms of the Cardiff economy, it only relates to the last ten years, or so and the image is quite poor, really. Still, I'm not particulary precious about any of the images, so if you want to put it back - please feel free. Your help on the project would be very welcome. Cheers, Daicaregos (talk) 19:29, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
You may not have noticed, but I've reinstated the Capital Tower image in the Economy, which seems significantly better at its bigger size. Daicaregos (talk) 21:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
RfC on reliable sources for Eurovision articles
A second RfC has been started on sourcing for Eurovision articles, you can view it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision#RfC on reliable sources for Eurovision articles. This RfC is critical as it will help determine how current and future Eurovision articles are sourced, and as much participation as possible is needed for a consensus to develop. You are being notified as you are listed as an active user of Wikipedia:WikiProject Eurovision, and hence the results of this RfC could have a large impact on the articles you edit. Camaron · Christopher ·talk 09:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
changes
Hey there i recently changed the list of stadia in wales by capacity to not include ninian park. i didnt do it because i dont like cardiff but because they have played there final league match there and will no longer play there again- which means it is defunct like the vetch. you recently reverted this back to the old format your reason being "Ninian Park still standing". so too does the vetch field but it isnt included in the list. so when cardiff are officially residents at there new stadium and officially moved out of ninian park, are you going to revert back to my format making all the necessary changes that are needed?
There are now over 2,800 articles associated with the project (100 more than last month) and all are assessed. If you happen to see a Eurovision related article without the ((EurovisionNotice)) template on the article's talk page, please add it. You can also read Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment if you would like to help reassess articles in our project if you see that they have outgrown their current assessment.
Following recent disputes relating to sourcing in Eurovision articles, an RfC has been opened on the issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision#RfC on reliable sources for Eurovision articles. The dispute particularly focuses on use of ESCToday and Oikotimes as sources in articles. The RfC is suffering from lack of participation; all project members are encouraged to state their opinion.
Project members are reminded that text and images in articles must follow Wikipedia's copyright policies. Text must not be copied out or copied and pasted into articles from websites whose material is not under a Wikipedia compatible free license. Fully copyrighted text includes that from the EBU (Eurovision.tv), ESCToday, and Okiotimes. Images must also not be uploaded onto Wikimedia Commons for use in Eurovision articles unless they are under a free license, this does not include most images on the internet or TV screen shots even if they were taken by the uploader. Copyrighted images may be uploaded onto the English Wikipedia (not Commons) for use in Eurovision articles if a valid claim of fair use can be made, note that the criteria are strict.
Eurovision News
Russia and Ukraine selected their entries to the Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2009, which will be held on 21 November in Kiev. Russia will be represented by 11-year-old Ekaterina Ryabova with the song "Malenkiy prints", while host country Ukraine will be represented by Andranik Alexanyan, also 11 years old, with "Tri topoli, tri surmy".
Welcome to the eleventh edition of the WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter!
Things are beginning to quiet down now that the 2009 Eurovision Song Contest is behind us, which is the project's busiest time of year. A few of us however still had to slow down during this period, including myself, as May and June also happens to be exam season in multiple parts of the world. There is much still to be done in any case with preparations for the 2010 Song Contest now well under way, and the host city, Oslo, now confirmed.
There are several items that this project needs to debate including choices of sourcing and what contests come under the banner of this project. The first of these items is already being addressed at a new RfC (see left). Further ideas that could be developed include creation of some article guidelines for Eurovision articles. This could start as an advisory essay and then later, if consensus permits, become an official Wikipedia guideline. Examples of these already in existence include Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines and Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines.
If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list. This Newsletter was delivered by Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 02:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
File:CardiffBusRoute55.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:CardiffBusRoute55.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. OsamaKReply? on my talk page, please 04:21, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Glamorgan Wanderers RFC
Do you have a copy of the Rothmans Yearbook? If so, would you mind checking the ref for Glamorgan Wanderers RFC and let me know which page it's on please (& the year). I don't have a copy, so just put page 10 (on the Sport in Cardiff article). Thanks, Daicaregos (talk) 12:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, meant to ask someone else. Nice talking to you though. ;) Daicaregos (talk) 12:43, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Cardiff - Sports
Hiya Welshleprechaun, I see you made some improvements to the Cardiff article. I've had a good think about it. It's really long already, and adding infromation and the sort of references we need is going to make it massive. I've looked at some city/country FAs and they seem to be between about 115,000 - 130,000 bytes (Peru is only 50,000 bytes). Cardiff is now at 139,327 bytes, which probably makes it too big already. What I've done, over the last week, is to move the Sports section over to the Sport in Cardiff article and (hopefully) improved that article by adding sports that weren't there previously, and adding infomation and references to those that were. It remains a work in progress, but I think I'm nearly there. The plan is to cut the Sports section in the Cardiff article down to two/three paragraphs, as part of the Culture section, which also needs to be cut (as does history). What do you think? Any advice would be welcome. Cheers, Daicaregos (talk) 11:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
West Wales
As someone who lived for many years on Gower Road in Swansea I know from first hand experience that most of the local population regard themselves as both in South Wales and in West Wales. This is not a problem since these areas are only vaguely defined but walking round Swansea market there is a very clear sense of much greater cultural, economic and social links with Wales west of Swansea, in Llanelli and Carmarthenshire, than there is with Cardiff and the Vale . Your exclusion of a useful map says more about your POV than about how the poeple of Swansea feel. VelelaVelela Talk 17:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
With all due and humble respect it is you that is being disruptive. I produced my own evidence that the local population regard themselves as being in West Wales (as well as South Wales) and you ? Well you said ".....whereas most commonly accepted to be in South Wales" on your edit of the 10th July. "Commonly accepted"? by whom ? Where is there evidence for this? Have you lived for a substantial time in Swansea ? Or is this a very partial view from Cardiff, do let me know, I would be so delighted. I also believe that threatening and bullying behaviour is ill advised and positively counter productive on Wikipedia. I will not trade in threats, and your adherence to well behaved debate would cut a great deal more ice with me than bombastic messages. VelelaVelela Talk 12:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Newcastle Airport
I do wish people would decide what they want on the Airport-dest-list. The usual criticism is that the airport name has been included rather than the city name. Now you are stating that it should be the airport name in preference to the city name. In this particular instance would that be Newcastle Airport, England; Newcastle Airport, New South Wales; or Newcastle Airport, South Africa? I presume that it's not Newcastle Airport, St Kitts and Nevis as that one has been renamed. It may seem a stupid question, but Jasepl has recently insisted on Palma de Mallorca rather than official title of Palma on the grounds that there is a tiny community in the outback of Uruguay (needless to say it doesn't have an airport) that shares the name, and that this could cause confusion between the two Palmas. There is also an insistance on describing Incheon International Airport as Seoul-Incheon, despite the fact that Incheon is a city with the same status as a province and has a population of 2.6 million and that Seoul doesn't appear in the airport name. This is justified on the grounds that the principal city served should be used, rather than the airport name. Can we have some consistency please? At least then those of us who aren't plane spotters could understand what's going on, and what's acceptable. Skinsmoke (talk) 22:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Okay, okay calm down. I was under the impression that it's always the airport name. Maybe you could bring it up at WP Airports and once a rule of consistency has been established, I'll be happy to comply. Welshleprechaun (talk) 10:19, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry if that came over a bit frantic. It wasn't meant to. Think that's a good idea to bring it up at WP Airports to see if we can try to get a policy that is clearly understandable. I've moved everything here to maintain the discussion thread (so you don't have to dart backwards and forwards between pages to see what's going on). Hope you don't mind. Skinsmoke (talk) 13:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Straw poll on reliable sources for Eurovision articles
The second RfC on sourcing for Eurovision articles has now being running for several weeks, you can view it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision#RfC on reliable sources for Eurovision articles. In order to help gauge the spread of opinion and draw conclusions from this discussion a straw poll has been started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision#Straw poll. All project members are encouraged to read the RfC thoroughly and then cast their votes as they see fit. Rationales are still encouraged in the main discussion area above the poll, and participants can add appropriate new sources or options to the poll as they wish. Camaron · Christopher ·talk 19:13, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - July 2009
Note: the Newsletter is "collapsed" for convenience. To see the full letter, click on the "show" button at the right end of the gray bar.
The RfC on article sourcing was closed by Moonriddengirl (talk·contribs) as an uninvolved editor. The decisions were for each source:
ESCToday: Reliable
ESCKaz: Semi-reliable
ESCTime: Not reliable
Oikotimes: No consensus
More details on the decision as well as the full RfC can be found on the project talk page. The decisions made in the RfC will likely impact on future drafts of the article guidelines. Please note that further use of Oikotimes and ESCTime is discouraged and existing uses should be replaced with reliable sources. If no other source exists for the information, leave the current source for the time being.
Due to a new naming convention relating to the use of the term "FYR Macedonia", the Republic of Macedonia should be referred to as "Macedonia" in Eurovision articles. Mention of the country's participation in the Contest under the name "FYR Macedonia" should be written in the lead of articles such as Macedonia in the Eurovision Song Contest, though it is not necessary to express this fact in the general Contest articles.
Two months after the 2009 Contest ended, the EBU revealed the full jury and televoting results for each country on its website. The results showed that Norway was the winner of both the jury and the televoting, while many placings would have changed had no jury voting taken place.
Georgia announced its return to the Contest, while the Czech Republic will withdraw from the 2010 Contest.
Welcome to the twelfth edition of the WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter!
It has been a very slow couple of months in terms of Eurovision news since the passing of the 2009 Contest, however, it has been a very busy time for guidelines and policies affecting our project. Landmark decisions have been made regarding our use of sources and even how we are to refer to Macedonia. In addition, several of our Good Articles have been delisted as part of a task force charged with maintaining the quality of Wikipedia's Good Articles.
With there being less information to add and therefore less to do for some, we need to focus on the upkeep and quality of our project's articles and getting those inactive members active once again. We can do this by making sure all new guidelines and naming policies are adhered to and by working to move articles up the quality scale. We are a WikiProject and we all work towards a similar goal. Introduce yourself to your fellow members and get active!
If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list. This Newsletter was delivered by Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 23:27, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
"Anglo-Welsh"
Hi, Welshleprechaun. Thought I'd let you know that I've taken the 'bold move' of redirecting Anglo-Welsh - which you'd tagged, quite rightly, as being of disputable accuracy - to Literature of Wales (English language) (aka by some as Anglo-Welsh literature). Hope you agree that it's an acceptable solution. By the way, do you have any opinion on the validity or otherwise of Category:Anglo-Welsh people, just recently created? Comes from the same direction, perhaps? Hwyl, Enaidmawr (talk) 00:01, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I found the twinning relationship on the Local Government Association website, it's list was updated in April 2008 [3] I do accept that image you posted but that picture was taken in April 2006. Hence I think the LGA is more up to date. Hope you are happy with this. Sloman (talk) 21:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - August 2009
Note: the Newsletter is "collapsed" for convenience. To see the full letter, click on the "show" button at the right end of the gray bar.
There has been some discussion on if a monthly newsletter is viable. The current result is not clear, though it appears for the time being months will simply be skipped as necessary when project activity is low.
There has been a heated debate on how to deal with criticism and controversy in Eurovision Song Contest article, with a proposal made to re-organise articles to avoid dedicated "controversy" and "criticism" sections in order to have maximum neutral point of view policy compliance.
The RTL Group has declared that they are seriously considering a return of Luxembourg to the Eurovision Song Contest for 2010.
Azerbaijan's participation in the 2010 Eurovision Song Contest has been put in doubt following controversial actions which are believed to have occurred after the 2009 Contest. Azerbaijan has denied that any questioning of individuals over voting in the contest has occurred.
Welcome to the thirteenth edition of the WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter!
August 2009 will not be remembered as a good month for WikiProject Eurovision. The number of this newsletter might have something to do with it, other possible explanations include circumstances, time of year, and even just coincidence. In any case we have had no new members and no further GA or FA article promotions.
The demotion of Eurovision Song Contest, probably the most important article on the project, was a historic blow. Reasons for this and other demotions in recent months include an inflation of article standards, article deterioration through inappropriate edits, and possibly inappropriate promotions in some cases.
We should remember however that despite these demotions we still have 2 FAs, 9 GAs, and 41 B-class articles, as well as 2 Featured Lists. This is a big achievement for a project with only 75 members, a small amount compared to other projects. To compare WikiProject Schools has 292 members with no newsletter, and WikiProject Video games has a massive 1,298 members with only a quarterly newsletter.
This project will likely be disadvantaged for a long time to come with limited membership and fluctuating activity during the year, but it will grow out of this blip.
Want to invite new members? Place our invitation template on the talk page of anyone you would like to invite to our project.
No new members joined the project in the month of August.
If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list. This Newsletter was delivered by Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 17:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Dude, why the bright banana yellow?Himalayan 21:42, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
I see, LOL. You've done a great job on Cardiff related articles BTW, things are developing well. Maybe a lighter yellow....Himalayan 18:56, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:Toulouse Metro St Cyprien.JPG
File Copyright problem
Thank you for uploading File:Toulouse Metro St Cyprien.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ww2censor (talk) 05:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - September and October 2009
Note: the Newsletter is "collapsed" for convenience. To see the full letter, click on the "show" button at the right end of the gray bar.
This is the first edition of the WikiProject Eurovision newsletter in a bimonthly format. Following a discussion on the project talk page this may now become the regular format for the newsletter during the months that the project is less active.
A proposal was made to change Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) to discourage the use of numeric dates, primarily YYYY-MM-DD (e.g. 2009-08-12 for 12 August 2009), in footnotes as at present it is only discouraged in the main article body. The proposal now seems unlikely to pass due to large levels of opposition, though it could have had a large impact on this project as the date format YYYY-MM-DD is frequently used in Eurovision for reference publication and access dates. Further discussion can be found on the project talk page.
Eurovision News
31 countries have confirmed their participation in the 2010 Contest. ESCToday has suggested that the Eurovision Song Contest may be entering a crisis due to the possibility of a large drop in the number of participants next year with the ongoing international recession hitting the budgets of many broadcasters in Europe.
Luxembourg and Monaco have both ruled out a return to the Eurovision Song Contest for 2010. A decision by San Marino on if to return or not has not yet been made.
Hungary declared it is pulling out of the Eurovision Song Contest due to the financial difficulties of the national broadcaster Magyar Televízió (MTV).
National selection details for the 2010 Contest are now available for sixteen countries. Despite the contest being over six months away, Bulgaria has already announced that the artist that will represent the country in 2010 will be Miroslav Kostadinov (who is frequently referred to as Miro).
It has been announced that the voting system used for the Eurovision Song Contest semi-finals will change in 2010. The previous system was introduced in 2008 along with the first use of two semi-finals; it involved nine out of ten final places per semi-final being determined exclusively by televote, with the tenth place being determined by juries. This will be replaced by a more balanced 50% jury voting, 50% televoting system.
Javine Hylton was also nominated for GA status but was quickly failed due to a large number of concerns. The nominator, Judo112 (talk·contribs), was later found to be a sock puppet of a previously blocked user.
Welcome to the fourteenth edition of the WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter!
There have been quite a few updates to the 2010 Contest article since 1 September. Nine countries (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Cyprus, Ireland, Macedonia, Malta, Poland, Serbia, and Slovenia) have confirmed their participation, and the article in general has seen many changes. Sadly, whilst some editors have been working hard to provide reliable sources, others have been less thorough and the article has had to be semi-protected again to prevent further disruption. This is a shame, as ideally anyone should be able to edit; however, the talk page is always available to bring new information to light.
The participating countries' section has also been updated to allow the inclusion of information about the language, artist and song (with an English translation as appropriate), although to date this is very much a work in progress. As news comes in, we look forward to enriching this section in the coming months—backed-up of course with sources!
No new country-specific articles have been written these past two months. If you want to add more detailed information about a country's participation in the 2010 Contest, this is the ideal way to do it, and they are very much appreciated by our readers.
If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list. This Newsletter was delivered by Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 19:38, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Vale of Glamorgan and Wales
Hi. I noticed you've done a lot of work on the Vale of Glamorgan. Dunno if you know but do you know about this site? It has a massive number of images for villages and roads and just about anywhere in the UK. I've already used to to provide images to many villages in the Vale and by the time I've finished I hope to provide photographs for every village in Wales. If you could upload some this would be great. Just have a search for local areas on geograph and you may be surprised. All the images can be used under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 license.Perry Rimmer (talk) 17:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Newport stadium capacity
I take it you haven't heard that the area behind the goal at the cricket end has been fenced off from the pitch and certified for 400 people? Owain (talk) 11:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Swansea
Hi - I changed Swansea because there was a lower-case <z> in SWONz and I thought the whole syllable was meant to be in caps. Lfh (talk) 15:50, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Unnecessary 'disambiguations'
Please note that there is only one (Welsh) Swansea article, and it is about the contemporary City and County of Swansea. Since the religion statistics in question - as with *all* stats cited in the article - refer to the same geographical area (and are described as statistics for "Swansea"[4]) no "disambiguation" is required. --Pondle (talk) 18:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
That may be so, but it is not clear. It does not specifically state that (nor should it). Disambiguations do more good than harm and should not be treated with hostility. Welshleprechaun (talk) 18:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
I disagree. If there were two separate "Swansea" articles, you may have a point, but the opening para makes it quite clear that Swansea is a city and county in Wales. The 1996 LA inherited the city status of its smaller predecessors. I'm not against an occasional reference to "the local authority" or something to avoid repeating words in the same sentence, but randomly changing references to 'Swansea' to 'City and County of Swansea' is pedantic, unnecessary and conflicts with the article title.--Pondle (talk) 18:47, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
The change was not 'random' as you described. My edits have reasons behind them. Whether the edit was necessary or not remains subject to opinion. Swansea remains mostly known across the country as a city (or urban area, or settlement, whatever your preferred word was), rather than a county. On the news, you don't hear of a house fire in the City and County of Swansea - it would be in Swansea or Gorseinon etc. This is why I favour the disambiguation. Welshleprechaun (talk) 18:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't think that I will convince you in this discussion, and you won't convince me. The fact remains that there is only one "Swansea" article, and it is about the whole City and County of Swansea. I've asked Ghmyrtle to comment, he's a geographer and well-established as an honest broker.--Pondle (talk) 19:07, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Bristol Airport
Re your comment: "Referencing material is one of the major policies of Wikipedia"
Certainly, that is true. But not for existing or recurring flights. All of the references I removed (and whoever added them was on quite the referencing spree, and repeated basically the same reference a hundred times), were from recurring/seasonal flights. The established project standard (available at WP:Airports and WP:Airlines in case in doubt) is to simply say [seasonal] after the seasonal destination, without mentioning resumption or suspension dates. And certainly not to use the word "recommencing". Refer any other airport article, and flights will be listed as "XXX [seasonal]". Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 08:54, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - November and December 2009
Note: the Newsletter is "collapsed" for convenience. To see the full letter, click on the "show" button at the right end of the gray bar.
Happy Christmas and new year from WikiProject Eurovision.
This is the second edition of the newsletter to be in a bimonthly format. This will probably continue at least up until the next Eurovision Song Contest when the project is more active.
Editors are reminded that some articles covered WikiProject Eurovision are subject to the biographies of living persons policy. This does not just include biography articles such as Alexander Rybak, but any article with material related to living persons. Such information is highly sensitive, and unsourced or poorly sourced material about living persons must be removed immediately. Material which may seen trivial to editors, such as a false claim of participation in a contest, can potentially be highly sensitive to the living persons involved.
Eurovision articles on this project have been repeatedly subject to a form of sneaky vandalism. This involves unregistered users adding false information to articles such as Eurovision Song Contest 2010 (while unprotected). These false claims are then made to look legitimate through the use of "fake references" with false titles and links, example. Cuchufleta (talk·contribs) was blocked indefinitely for creating multiple hoax articles with the same editing technique. Editors are advised to look out for further disruption of this kind, as it seems to be originating from a determined individial or an organised group. More information can be found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision#User:Cuchufleta.
Eurovision News
The EBU released their participants list for the 2010 Eurovision Song Contest on 31 December 2009. 39 countries will take part. Five of these qualify directly to the final, with the 34 remaining countries each competing in one of two semi-finals (seventeen per semi-final).
Five countries have declared they will be withdrawing from the contest in 2010. The Czech Republic are withdrawing due to three semi-final failures and a lack of interest from Czech viewers. Andorra, Hungary, Lithuania, and Montenegro have all declared they are withdrawing for financial reasons.
Georgia is the only country that has declared it will be returning to the contest.
No debuts are planned either with Liechtenstein's only broadcaster 1FLTV having ruled out joining the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) for December 2009. This made a debut by the country for the 2010 Contest no longer possible.
Despite the 2010 Contest being many months away countries are now actively declaring which artists and songs will be representing them at the contest. A table for this can be found at Eurovision Song Contest 2010#Participants. Nearly all of the declared participants now have dedicated entry articles.
Welcome to the fifteenth edition of the WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter!
Another decade has past for the Eurovision Song Contest. The naughties will probably be remembered as a decade of both success and controversy for the contest.
Televoting reached its peak in the early 2000s. This gave the contest a more democratic edge, but by 2008 it was widely believed to have made Eurovision resemble a political and geographic football match rather than a song contest. The EBU took action in 2009 by reducing televoting to having only a 50% weighting in the results of each contest.
Many new countries have joined the contest in the last decade, bringing the number of participants to a new high. Among this some countries withdrew while others returned, though one of the major missing countries, Italy, did not make a return as was hoped by many.
There was not a shortage of controversy either. Two participants went to war, and the buzz over the planned participation of Kosovo put Eurovision in the middle of a political storm. One also cannot forget that this decade saw the introduction of two spin-off contests - the Junior Eurovision Song Contest and the Eurovision Dance Contest. It is still not fully clear on how these fit into this project, perhaps we will work that out during the tens.
If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list. This Newsletter was delivered by xenobot 14:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
sure, my pleasure! --Ciphers (talk) 09:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Re: Troublemaker
Not to worry, he's been indef blocked. Cheers, Bettia(talk) 15:17, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
United Kingdom references
Hi. I just noticed this edit you made to the United Kingdom article. You state in your edit summary that all references are in the respective articles, but please note that, per WP:CIRCULAR, Wikipedia articles shouldn't be used as sources for other Wikipedia articles, which is what your suggestion amounts to. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I've checked this out Larry. You're not understanding what's going on here. Welshleprechaun is saying that references to the points he's making exist in the articles being referred to, and so they do. Take a look again. Everything's OK here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiro Miyake (talk • contribs) 21:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I fully understand that the references exist in the articles that are linked to. My point is that that's not enough. The references needed to be added to the UK article, where they were required as well. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I have reverted your changes to the UK article, per WP:BRD. This page is one of the most visited on Wikipedia. You are required to obtain a consensus before restoring your preferences. I'm sure you're adding this material in good faith, but repeated enforcement of personal tastes is frowned upon; the present images have appeared over a long period of discussion. Bold changes appear arbitary, Cambrocentric, and unjustified. --Jza84 | Talk 18:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Wow! Take that as a telling off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiro Miyake (talk • contribs) 21:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
The problem was that there were no references. Now there are. So now your problem with the images is...? Welshleprechaun (talk) 09:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
My problem wasn't with the images but since the existing ones are well-established, you should probably discuss the changes you want to make at Talk:United Kingdom. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Eglinton name
I would like to know why you are trying to label the village of Eglinton with a name which it lost over three centuries ago? The Irish name of an Mhagh means Muff, it does not mean Eglinton. Please explain your logic. --81.187.71.75 (talk) 00:05, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Move of James Caan
was this discussed somewhere in advance? Check the talk page of the more notable person, and you'll see it was proposed, and shot down, once before. Maybe not a good idea. ++Lar: t/c 03:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Dab Cat vs template
I still haven't found a Dab-like page that justifies placing [[Category:Disambiguation]] on a Dab page; this time ((hndis applies)). Thanks! --Jerzy•t 10:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.