User talk:Lidos

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

Sources list for UK Lidos[edit]

The question --

At the moment the sources list User:Lidos/Sources is a handy list for cut & pasting books or articles in the standard citation format into lido articles. With a bit more work this could become a stand alone list, i.e. an article in its own right. The benefit would then be to be able to add the list in a "See also" section to any lido article (probably lido and other generic articles on swimming pools) rather than having to argue the case for adding a long list of books in a "Further reading" section or similar. Such sections are better avoided as they become a dumping ground for any weak potential source that an editor has not actually read but found by a google books search.

So my recommendation would be to stick to only adding those books used as reference sources on lidos and continue to add and (optionally) format generally useful sources from Books into User:Lidos/Sources with a longer term objective of creating List of books about lidos. To meet the guidance of WP:SAL an inclusion criteria would need to be defined in the lead text explaining why books on the list are notable (possibly by their level of use as citations in other publications; which can be tested by a search on Google Scholar).—Speedo (talk) 08:43, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

see my comment on Google Books URLs--Lidos (talk) 14:55, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure there is any WP policy on Google book links. They are relatively neutral, though most useful where Google has managed to get the full preview. An alternate is to use a WorldCat link (see my Greasemonkey script at http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/59173) which is completely unaffiliated and is the same thing as adding an OCLC number (gives the same link but without confusing the reader by supplying ISBN and OCLC).—Speedo 22:18, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NB Beetstra removed the sentence "External links to a reference in Google Books or Google Scholar etc. can be extremely helpful as such sources are easy to verify" from Wikipedia:External_links--Lidos (talk) 17:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Following up on the question of 'do we add them all?', probably not, or at least not in as much detail. If the list is to be quoted as a sort of extended further reading list then the inclusion criteria should be clear on why certain books or articles are sufficiently notable to be included. The list should be of public interest and relevant to readers to lido articles but it should be kept in mind that anyone can do a search on Google Books or Google Scholar to find a general list so a Wikipedia list should probably add that much more value by discriminating in favour of articles that provide new information, useful detail or historic significance. I'll make the current list (which is still reasonably short) a public article and we can consider refining the inclusion criteria later...—Speedo (talk) 13:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How does <ref name=Smith2006/><ref name=CS153300109 > work? Where do you get the number from? Can one stop superscript a and b appearing?

The name parameter is a handy way of cross referencing the same footnote in several places (WP:FN), avoiding duplicating the whole text of the footnote, i.e. the whole footnote text is only defined once (but need not be the first usage within the text). The name is arbitrary but must be unique within the article, cannot be just digits and would have to be in quotation marks if it includes spaces. In this case I'm using the Chicago/Harvard style last name and year for a book and for The Times I'm (automatically) using the article reference number on the archive website. The superscript letters are automatic links to the different places in the text the footnote is used. This type of layout is standard across Wikipedia though some further intricate tweaks are shown within WP:FN such as special sub-section footnote layouts (in effect filters on the reflist).—Speedo (talk) 17:27, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Use WP:CITESHORT simpler for multiple page refs.--Lidos (talk) 20:38, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinates for lidos[edit]

The simplest way to get coords on the pages is to use {{coords}}. I use Google Maps on Firefox with a handy greasemonkey script to show the coordinates on the page (this script). The template to get the coordinates to float on the top right of a wiki page then looks like:

{{ coords | <lat> | <long> | display=title }}

Note that using display=title implies that the coordinates refer to the entire wikipedia article and also means that the article will (eventually) automatically appear on Google Earth maps.

To cater for a more appropriate detailed zoom level in most applications the type can be set:

{{ coords | <lat> | <long> | display=title | region:GB_type:landmark }}

Example URL from the Google Maps link button:

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=gourock,+scotland&ie=UTF8&ll=55.95809,-4.811325&spn=0.037285,0.056219&t=h&z=14&iwloc=A (the default location for Gourock, which happens to be the middle of the harbour). So this example looks like: 55°57′29″N 4°48′41″W / 55.95809°N 4.811325°W / 55.95809; -4.811325

—Speedo (talk) 09:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • For smaller lidos use inline coordinates within an existing article, eg for the village
<ref>{{ coords | <lat> | <long> | region:GB_type:landmark }}</ref>

eg List of protected areas of Estonia 

<ref>{{coord|51.515|-0.116|region:GB_scale:5000}}</ref>
not sure display=inline is needed
Checking the template, this is optional as if display is not set it defaults to "inline".—Speedo (talk) 08:30, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Lead section in Wikipedia[edit]

User:Fæ aka Speedo wrote in 2009:
The rephrasing of the lead was interesting (checkout WP:LEAD), I'm not sure where the guidance is about not including a full address. I think the answer may be with WP:Naming conventions (geographic names)#United Kingdom, in summary this appears to say that the lead should include sufficient detail of location to disambiguate the location, preferably using the ceremonial county name. To disambiguate you should not rely on postcode (probably because this is a proprietary system and so cannot be used graphically on mapping tools such as Google Maps). It should be noted however, that this does not preclude the use of postcode as additional detail (as far as I can see) but in practice I cannot see postcodes being quoted for other good quality location articles - e.g. Heron Tower.

Infobox use -- template:Infobox Swimming Pool[edit]

Most buildings or significant places make use of infoboxes. They are a very optional sort of feature but can give a class of articles (such as historic buildings) a sense of common format and data. I have created a draft for swimming pools (the currently existing types of infobox for buildings and sports centres did not seem to fit) which is at User:Speedo/infobox_swimming_pool and an example of use at User:Speedo/sandbox. The layout (such as displayed order of parameters and what parameters to include) is configurable with the advantage that if used any improvements or style changes would apply to all pages at once. If we think it is a good idea then it can be finalized and made into a standard template.—Speedo (talk) 12:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great minds... I had exactly the same idea. Mine was based on Template:Infobox_UK_property. Not sure where I can make comments on the fields you've chosen, plus my suggestions, so I'll use User_talk:Speedo/infobox_swimming_pool--Lidos (talk) 21:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Speedo, for all your hard work and tweaking of this Infobox.--Lidos (talk) 13:19, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers, is there an initial one or two lidos that you think would be good to use the infobox first?—Speedo (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about Gourock Outdoor Pool, and Broomhill Pool, Ipswich (need to choose which photo to put in Infobox and where to put the other one). --Lidos (talk) 16:17, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]



Yahoo Groups[edit]

Unfortunately it's unlikely that any Yahoo Group can be added as a source. Such groups count as user forums and are only quoted where they are the official on-line forum for a page about that user group or association. See WP:ELNO which has a specific mention of Yahoo! and has a very extensive debate on the subject (several times in fact) on the associated talk page. It is possible to add an open directory link where such groups are listed, if they appear somewhere like http://www.dmoz.org/Sports/Water_Sports/Swimming_and_Diving/Organizations/Europe/United_Kingdom/ for example. I suggest that if such links are added to List of sources on lidos it is not implied that these can be used as reliable sources in themselves, but perhaps as the official user groups where associated reliable sources are discussed. Using this approach the guidance of WP:ELOFFICIAL applies. In practice I think this would mean that they may be okay as links on Lidos where the organizations the forums represent might be mentioned but not on a page about a specific lido.—Speedo (talk) 14:36, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed temporarily from List of sources on lidos but left on Lidos--Lidos (talk) 16:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the lidos article it's probably worth integrating them into the main body (the campaigns section?) and including the links in the text or as footnotes saying these are the official websites (unless the groups have associate fixed websites, in which case hopefully these point to the forums and just the fixed websites can be referenced). Left in the External links section they are like a flag to red bull-ish Wikipedian. I think they can be re-added to the sources list if clearly qualified as the true official sites. Alternatively perhaps the groups meet the requirements of WP:CLUB, some of the campaign groups probably do, and so could have their own Wikipedia article which can be wlinked (nobody could argue against that).—Speedo (talk) 16:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia_talk:External_links#Yahoo_Groups hehe.--Lidos (talk) 16:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some editors find it very frustrating to see the same old Yahoo or, even worse, Youtube links added to popular articles again and again and again (forever) mostly by newbies who try to argue the case each time. The spam bot gets some of this without any argument, and sometimes it pays to relax, leave it for 24 hours to see if a problem sorts itself out. Luckily lidos are rather less likely to be troublesome.—Speedo (talk) 16:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See recent responses at Wikipedia_talk:External_links#Yahoo_Groups.--Lidos (talk) 09:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It looks to be a sensible debate. Again, the easiest way to work within the guidance is to link to a site which also links to the yahoo forum. In this case official static websites do exist which point to the forum, so there would be little confusion for the reader.—Speedo (talk) 09:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Contributors on Lidos[edit]

I live near London Fields Lido and could help with editing Matttwd (talk) 11:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2009 London Fields Lido
Welcome! Perhaps you could try creating London Fields Lido based on the layout of Parliament Hill Lido? http://www.hackney.gov.uk/c-londonfields-lido.htm looks like the official site and http://homepage.ntlworld.com/oliver.merrington/lidos/lidos1.htm#londonfields is a key source for information. As it could be your first page, I suggest you initially try editing it in my sandbox area User:Speedo/sandbox where there is an old version of Parliament Hill Lido to get you started and nothing you edit can 'break' any live articles.—Speedo (talk) 08:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See also a previous use Miniscule of Sound.--Lidos (talk) 08:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Buses in Uxbridge[edit]

I've tidied up the buses section as requested. Although the London Transport Wikiproject does not have a standard for such things, a simple list of routes is sufficient to avoid giving undue prominence what should be a minor section. --DavidCane (talk) 23:05, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eyjafjallajökull[edit]

Thanks for the citation about the summit height; I didn’t know where it had come from (though it seems to have disappeared from the page again).
It does add to the confusion a bit, though; the Icelandic Land Survey maps here show different heights at different times, and the peaks seem to have changed their names also.
The boncherry map looks like it's based on the 1908 1:50.000 map, while the 1990 1:50,000 map, (the one I used) has different heights, and a different layout of the peaks. Confusingly, the 1990 1:100,000 map is the same as the 1908 1:50,000, not the other 1990 one. I don't know the reason for this; the 1990 1:50,000 looks the most modern, but it's somewhat outnumbered.
I'm sort of glad our facts only have to be verifiable! Anyway, thanks again! Moonraker12 (talk) 12:14, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup Cambridge 8[edit]

Wikipedia:Meetup/Cambridge 8 will be on Saturday 24 July. As you may have seen. Hope to see you there. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback: Nils von Barth – Venetian Pool[edit]

See my talk and hope you’re feeling healthier! —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 19:00, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles vs userpages[edit]

Hi. I'm wondering about list of sources on lidos, which -- I'm sorry -- just isn't an article, no way no how.

Would you mind if I moved it into your userspace? DS (talk) 20:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did you move it, before it was deleted? I put some comments on User_talk:Roscelese#List_of_sources_on_lidos.--Lidos (talk) 17:22, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I did not, but I'm an admin so I can restore it and move it if you want. Shall I? DS (talk) 18:30, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes please, if you could put it in my userspace it could be useful. Thanks.--Lidos (talk) 18:38, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. DS (talk) 19:00, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of sources on lidos for deletion[edit]

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sources on lidos until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:58, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems I'm too late to respond to this discussion!--Lidos (talk) 17:24, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost Interview[edit]

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject London Transport for an upcoming edition of The Signpost. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, you can find the interview questions here. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. If you have any questions, you can leave a note on my talk page. Have a great day. – SMasters (talk) 02:38, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brought to you by Simply south 19:53, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but so far have only done minor edits to a few pages within the project.--Lidos (talk) 08:52, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tropicana Weston-super-Mare[edit]

Could you take a look at a new article on Tropicana Weston-super-Mare?— Rod talk 15:45, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Airbus G-EUPC[edit]

The article I created Airbus G-EUPC was proposed for deletion because of the following concerns by editors: Not notable outside of the 2012 Summer Olympics torch relay, failing WP:GNG and WP:ONEEVENT.

For discussion see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Airbus_G-EUPC.

The entire article has been copied (userification) here User:Lidos/Airbus G-EUPC.

I was advised that I can simply delete comments put here - see Removal of comments, notices, and warnings - as the AfD is now concluded.--Lidos (talk) 14:14, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to MILHIST[edit]

Hello and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Anotherclown (talk) 21:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RAF Air Section 2[edit]

Good Evening As you deal with military articles, have you heard of RAF Air Section 2 before? The article has never had any references and has existed since February 2010.Gavbadger (talk) 17:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, not heard of it. Is it in the standard reference books?--Lidos (talk) 18:28, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
None at all. I will put it up for deletion. Also I know you care about RAF Waterbeach but please do not turn the majority of the RAF section into tables. One giant table like a large version of the minor units section from the RAF Thorney Island article would be better and could be located within the section but have at least a couple of paragraphs of normal writing above it. Gavbadger (talk) 18:43, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I found a reference to AS2 on the web, but no official sources. Please address comments on RAF Waterbeach on its Talk page - further paragraphs of text will follow. btw I used RAF Kirton in Lindsey as a template.--Lidos (talk) 09:25, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Tonbridge Swimming Pool[edit]

A tag has been placed on Tonbridge Swimming Pool requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.tonbridgepool.co.uk/cgi-bin/buildpage.pl?mysql=1670&mode=print.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 14:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If all the sentences have been copied I suppose this should be deleted. Some may have comes from [www.lidos.org.uk].--Lidos (talk) 08:28, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Someone has RV to last good version, couldn't you have done this? --Lidos (talk) 09:15, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Lidos. 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]

Voting for the Military history WikiProject Historian and Newcomer of the Year is ending soon![edit]

 

Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.

March Madness 2017[edit]

G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:

  • tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
  • updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
  • creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.

For the Milhist co-ordinators. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:24, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Military history WikiProject Coordinator election[edit]

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Military Historian of the Year and Newcomer of the Year nominations and voting[edit]

As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User group for Military Historians[edit]

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive[edit]

Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:22, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lidos&oldid=1182915670"