Hi. Regarding your recent disambiguation of Charles Frost - first, it's common to disambiguate by brief descriptor rather than lifespan, so Charles Frost (politician) rather than Charles Frost (1882-1964). Secondly, it is your responsibility as the mover to fix the incoming links to the disambiguation page, which can be found under "What links here" on the left-hand toolbar. Generally, no articles should link to disambiguation pages. Thanks! Frickeg (talk) 20:46, 27 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

No worries! Happens to all of us. Frickeg (talk) 23:41, 27 September 2012 (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.

Charles Frost (antiquary) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Myton

Closed cinemas in Kingston upon Hull (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bingo

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 1 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Your recent editing history at Alfred Watkins shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Dougweller (talk) 20:45, 1 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Please dont't: Create links like this: [[First Hull Trains|Hull Trains]], or create references like this : <ref>http://www.greatsouthernrail.com.au/site/about_us/our_company.jsp Great Southern Rail company history</ref>

See Wikipedia:Piped link, and Wikipedia:Bare URLs

also not Create links like this: [[Hull Paragon Interchange|Hull]] - this is called an easter egg link and should be avoided - see Wikipedia:Easter_egg#EGG - I would have thought it better to have the link referring to the page's actual name, although obviously it does link

Also avoid removing information from the body of the article and only have it present in the - see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section - the obscure official name of a company is not really a topic for the lead. - pretty standard on every other Train Operating Company page

As please try to get your facts right - GB railways - did not launch First Hull Trains in 2000 because it was not called that then - First Hull Trains did not come into existance until later - anachronism - aware of that I even inserted the month in 2008.

This link http://www.greatsouthernrail.com.au/site/about_us/our_company.jsp you added to "In the financial year to April 1999 the company made a profit of £1.2million on a turnoved of £87.2 million, the following year it recorded loss of £0.7million on a turnover of £86.9million. In October 1999 GB Railways sold its 19.7% share in Great Southern Railway to Serco resulting in a on-off profit of £1.4 million." confirms nothing of the previous sentence - it simply isn't helpful -see Template:failed verification - confirms the month

Please take these comments on board -there are good reasons why all these things should be avoided

Well done spotting the missing and partially incorrect info about the Northern franchise - I have added that with a reference, plus the info about the 80% share in Hull trains.Oranjblud (talk) 01:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Also there is no such company as Hull Trains Ltd

the 7 year "Anglia" franchise has always been Anglia Railways, back from 1995, can't see the need for inverted commas D47817 (talk) 04:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

I've placed a reformatted (non-interlaced, and readable) version of this reply at User talk:D47817#GB railways. It would probably be useful to carry on the conversation there and keep it in one place. —Sladen (talk) 10:24, 8 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Look - you don't move references from the body of the article to the lead. There is nothing gained from linking to the G13 Pty website as it doesn't verify anything additional.

There isn't a source to show that it was founded to bid for rail franchises in the United Kingdom during the Privatisation of British Rail so stop adding it or find a source.

Also the article Anglia Railways is about a company and NOT THE FRANCHISE.

I've had to correct you doing this twice before and I'm getting FUCKI8NG SICK OF IT.Oranjblud (talk) 16:17, 20 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

• Company name info should be contained in the footnotes

• If GB Railways was not formed to bid for rail franchises in the United Kingdom during the Privatisation of British Rail then why was it founded? Companies are required to have an objective when they are formed. Had it not been for the privatisation of BR, it is unlikely the former BR managers and other industry professionals would have formed an alliance. GB also bid for other franchises including Gatwick Express and WAGN.

• G13 Pty Ltd, gives a reference to who this company are

• "Anglia", Anglia Railways and Anglia Railways Trains Services Limited, all in one sentence is messy, think the Anglia Railways article adequately sets out the differences. 7 year should read seven-year.

• Would have thought GB's corporate brochure that you have removed was a worthy source: http://www.grandavenue.plus.com/MyWeb/Passenger_files/Delivering%20Better%20Train%20Services.pdf

• "was the parent company of a number of train operating companys", should read train operating companies

• Notes lack consistency, either needs to state the groups that won the franchises (National Express Group, Arriva and Serco-Abellio) or the TOCs (National Express East Anglia, Arriva Trains Wales and Northern Rail) not a combination of the two. Lack of cites.

• Unlikely the management of First Hull Trains was taken over by First TransPennine Express, Department for Transport are insistent that franchised and open access operators have separate management. FHT is run out of Hull, FTPE out of Manchester. FHT appointed their current MD in February 2011.

• GB Railfreight better described as a freight operator rather than on open access rail company.D47817 (talk) 23:09, 20 October 2012 (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.

Thomas Elliot Harrison (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Rugby, River Ouse, Edward Chapman and William Chapman

William de la Pole (Chief Baron of the Exchequer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Henry VII and Myton

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:19, 8 October 2012 (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.

John Gibb (1776-1850) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Banff and Cullen

MaK G 1204 BB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Am 842

Neville Hill depot (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Grand Central

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi - the article on the tramway was published in IRS Journal 213. It has lead to another e-mail the text of which I thought you might find interesting.

Dear David,

Thank you for sending me the snippet about the Welwick gravel line. I knew about it, and have the following information to add to the PDF you sent me.

The landowner is very interested in the history of the line. He has a length of the rail in one of his barns. He took Mary and I down to look at the remains of concrete bunker where the gravel was graded. I have pictures of these remains. The line closed as a result of the East Coast Floods of January / February 1953, which overwhelmed everything at the Humber bank workings. According to one local source, the locos were dumped at the main road end of the line, next to the approaches to Haverfield Farm, until the late 1950s. All the sand and gravel went out by lorry from a loading stage next to the Patrington to Easington road.

Look forward to hearing from you soon.

Best wishes

Phil Mathison

--Davidvaughanwells (talk) 22:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Oranjblud
Please see Template talk:Infobox train#Additional fields and Template talk:Infobox train#Add parameter "fuelcap". Those are "loose ends". Peter Horn User talk 23:08, 10 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Nobody "bit" yet. Peter Horn User talk 19:54, 23 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

now don't get me wrong, i'm sure you're a good person as well as a pretty good wikipedia editor - but why is it that almost every time someone makes a decent looking edit (ie it doesn't contain spam or anything like that, and appears to have been made with the best of intentions) you don't like, you revert that edit completely and tell the person who made it to read this editing rule and that editing rule - and do so in the manner of, with all due respect, a disapproving parent or school teacher?

surely you realize that is not the right way of going about things? more often than not it makes the person feel like they're being ordered about, being told what to do - and as a consequence, they react in a hostile manner, like re-reverting their edits and flinging the odd unsavory word. i strongly doubt you would like that.

therefore, if you see such an edit, why don't you be just that bit more sympathetic and persuasive? discuss this edit with the person who made it, suggest any compromises for this edit, and if you think they should read an editing rule, then recommend it to them, rather than order them to read it.

that way, edit wars and insults are much less likely, and everyone should be satisfied.

just my two cents. 96.228.117.93 (talk) 02:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Can you get this image moved to English Wikipedia or wikimedia commons http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:Parovoz_OR21.jpg

I would like to include it here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_steam_locomotive_classes#Locomotives_built_after_1925

Thanks in advance

i can't help but notice that you've only made two edits since last october, and both of those came in december.

you haven't been blocked from editing - so have you just decided to give up wikipedia altogether? 71.164.65.30 (talk) 14:44, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Please see my proposal to speedily rename Category:Named passenger rail services in France to *Category:Named passenger rail services of France Hugo999 (talk) 11:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Special:Contributions/86.41.152.149. Thank you. Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 19:44, 22 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on Category:Civil parishes in the metropolitan borough of Sheffield 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 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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkltalk 20:50, 7 December 2021 (UTC)Reply