User talk:Parrot of Doom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

i believe the picture of the supports at ladyshore bleach works are actually the remains of a railway bridge, as me and my brother found bolts and line remants after a little searching around. also on an old map i have it show a bridge called "owl bridge" which appears to enter a tunnel on the steep embankment. on the other side of the river is an old gas lamp and some stone steps covered in undergrowth. by the way whats the story with you and the cathedral steps? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.67.35.137 (talk) 23:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Manchester Cathedral steps

Thanks for your message on my talk page. I'm not an admin - just someone who hates seeing peoples' hard work damaged by vandals. I found your article interesting and informative - which is just what Wikipedia should be. DuncanHill 17:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the support Duncan! Parrot of Doom 17:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I think your idea about contactimg Manchester Library is a good one - they may well have a variety of archive material which could be used to expand the article. Have you ever found a website called "Subterranea Brittanica"? It has lots of info on "Underground Britain" (mines, defence bunkers, old railway tunnels etc) - and is often linked from Wikipedia as a source for articles. I'll have a look on it to see if there is any info on the Cathedral Steps. DuncanHill 17:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Excellent idea Duncan, yes I've seen the site and the fascinating images of the underground canal. By the way I'm only used to editing wiki pages so if I stuff up the formatting of this page, please forgive me :) Could you advise me though, how do I report instances of vandalism such as have occured, and is it the admin's job to flag these instances on that user's talk page? Parrot of Doom 17:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

To report Vandalism go to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and follow the instructions there. Before reporting to that page, the vandal should (normally) have received Warnings on their talk page. You can find information about which warnings to use here Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. Any editor can warn a vandal to stop - and any editor can make a report to the Admin Intervention page. I'm adding a welcome box for you on this page - it has some really useful links to help you find your way about Wikipedia. DuncanHill 18:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Superb Duncan thank you very much for that help. I sometimes find the formatting tools in Wikipedia quite daunting, and have to keep looking at other people's pages to understand how it all goes together! Parrot of Doom 18:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome Box - Really Useful Stuff

[edit] Manchester Cathedral Steps again

I've got the page on my watchlist, and if the vandalism continues I shal request semi-protection for it. Semi-protection would stop unregistered users editing it - and all the vandalism has been from unregistered users. DuncanHill 23:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly. I'm only surprised they haven't vandalised my other contributions. Parrot of Doom 00:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

There isn't always much rhyme or reason to the actions of vandals - though reading through the forum on one of the links suggests something of a "secret knowledge" attitude amongst some of the people there. DuncanHill 00:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

This is exactly the attitude I encountered - they're not doing this for the benefit of others, they're doing it basically to impress themselves and their friends, and to brag about their exploits. When I joined up and asked politely where the tunnels were, my posts were removed and I was subsequently banned. Thats why they hate the wiki article, it reveals to a wider audience things that they'd rather only a select few were aware of. They won't even allow anybody on that forum to reveal their location, in case the council find out and stop them from getting in. Personally I'm happy for that to happen, if only to reduce the risk of vandalism. Parrot of Doom 00:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

And now it would appear that one has tried a different tactic, by suggesting on the discussion page that the steps are discussed in other wikis. Not any I've found. Parrot of Doom 22:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I just saw that - but it would not make any difference to there being an article on WP even if htere are articles elsewhere. DuncanHill 22:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] speedy deletion tag

Just so you know, 89.242.25.157 has tagged the article for speedy deletion Pit-yacker 14:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up and the contributions. I have edited his/her talk page and asked him to elaborate. I very much doubt he/she will. Parrot of Doom 16:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] British Canal photos...

Hi, Thank you uploading your recent images of British canals. It would be much appreciated if you would consider also uploading them to Wikimedia Commons ( a repository for free media and images) so that other projects can make use of them. ShakespeareFan00 12:07, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you mate - excuse an amateur, but could you provide a brief description on how I do that? I have many more images of the canals, nearly all from my bike rides. Parrot of Doom 12:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Go to Commons:Commons:Upload/en create an account and start upload as you would on en.Geni 13:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I have uploaded a few images already. Its a little bit convoluted, it would be nice just for Wiki to transfer the images automatically but I'm quite happy to do this :) You can see what I've added here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Parrot_of_Doom Parrot of Doom 13:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wet Earth Pit

I have put a reply to your question on the talk page... regards Phil......Geotek 23:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

If you contact Alan at the Salford Mining museum - Buile Hill - I am sure he will be able to help you with all the underground stuff. I went down before the HSE put the no access order on the adits with the Salford Underground Group.......good luck....Phil Geotek 01:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I've uploaded a few here, for which I have permission http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wet_Earth_Colliery Parrot of Doom 09:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Manchester Cathedral Steps again....again!

Good work on expanding the article and adding references. Just to let you know, a new editor called Userscott has edited the article, basically just duplicating sections. I reverted his edits, and left a message on his talk page, where he claimed to have added new info, and to have been doen the tunnels. I pointed out that he had added nothing new, just duplicated existing info, and pointed out to him that I am familiar with the vandalism on the article. He then blanked his talk page (but of course you can read what was there by clicking the "history" tab). Anyway, I see that one of the "28 days later" users is also called Userscott. DuncanHill 22:35, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

userscott was one of the two people who entered the stages. I don't think any of them quite understand the purpose of Wikipedia. I didn't create the page so they could big themselves up :/ Parrot of Doom 22:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

28 Days Later doesn't appear to be a community dedicated to spreading knowledge to the world.... more an "insiders' club". DuncanHill 22:49, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

A shame really. They banned me for no apparent reason. I've looked at his edits and I can't really make head nor tale of them. Perhaps hes just getting used to the site, and will contribute later. Parrot of Doom 22:51, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thomas Cook image

Hi again! I added the image from Thomas Cook to Manchester Exchange railway station as I thought it might be useful for illustrating that. I assume given the licence and the fact that the image is over 100 years old (thus out of copyright???) this is ok with Thomas Cook? Pit-yacker 14:27, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes mate, they've given their permission for it to be used under the creative commons licence so its absolutely fine :) Parrot of Doom 17:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

If you want to use a reference multiple times:
On the first use of the reference in text you just define it as normal, with the exception that you give it a name. eg.:
<ref name="The Dictionary">reference details</ref>

(compare with the "usual form" for a single reference - <ref>reference details</ref>)

When you want to use the same reference again you need to put (Note the extra slash at the end of the "tag"):
<ref name="The Dictionary" />

Hope this makes things a little clearer Pit-yacker 23:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I always forget to go for a slash :) That was what I missed! Parrot of Doom 23:31, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:MBB canal map.gif

How did you get this image released under CC-BY-SA-3.0?Geni 00:22, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Hiya. I spoke to the author of the image, Alan Taylor, and he gave his permission for it to be used. Did I use an incorrect licence? Parrot of Doom 08:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

What was the exact wording of the permission?Geni 09:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

"Not a problem" - I can clarify it with him if you like - I'll send him a link to the licence. Parrot of Doom 10:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes you need to explictly get it released under a license and idealy an email sent to permissions@wikimedia.org.Geni 13:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Hm, well all he said in his email was 'not a problem' when I asked him if it was ok to use the image for 'strictly non-commercial reasons' (from my pov that is - of course the licence allows the image to be used for commercial purposes - I've told him that and he hasn't objected). I have included his email address in the image for anyone to double check. Parrot of Doom 13:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Wordings like 'strictly non-commercial reasons' are kinda dicey. That is why it is best to get something sent to permissions@wikimedia.org who know rather more about what wordings of permissions are ok.Geni 15:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Righty I'll fire off an email just to be sure. Parrot of Doom 16:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Canal Icons

Hi. I have left a response to your question on my talk page. It seems a bit easier to follow that way. Bob1960evens 16:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Well done on the dock icon. Unfortuately, the docks and wharfs use a different naming convention, without the 'u', and I was hoping to get some agreement to change the names before all the green ones were created. Oh well, never mind! Bob1960evens 19:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I have just noticed your comment about feeders, overflows, etc, on my talk page, so sorry for the delay in replying. I agree it would be useful to have some icons, as I needed one for the Chasewater feeder on the Wyrley and Essington Canal map, and more recently on the Stover Canal map. My instinct would be to use a thinner line (40 or 50 pixels instead of 100) and to use the light blue colour. Do you think it needs airing more widely before we jump? Bob1960evens 17:52, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I doubt anyone would have any problems, and I agree with your suggestion. I'll have a play this week if I get chance. I'm not technically well up on Illustrator (I'm more a Potatoshop person). There are loads of icons to be 'invented', for instance an icon with a JCB superimposed for an area under restoration :) Parrot of Doom 22:26, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I haven't heard from you, so I have created a right handed feeder BSicon_uFEEDERr: and a right handed feeder reservoir BSicon_uRESRr: . I'll try them out on the Grantham Canal map, and add the rest if they look ok. The reservoir originally had a much bigger blue bit, but although it looked find in inkscape, Wiki showed it as a peculiar shape. I'm not sure of the contrast between the dam and the water, either. Bob1960evens 18:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I've had another go, and altered the shape of the reservoir. Bob1960evens 18:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I've been away working, the icons look great. I'm just a bit busy travelling right now but I will pay attention to these icons and try and help Parrot of Doom 18:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] tidbits

The Viaduct originally carried the Manchester, Bury & Rossendale Railway line from 28 September 1846 and had become a component of the East Lancashire Railway on 21 July 1845. The line was abandoned in the 1970's. The line to Bury closed on 5 December 1961.

http://books.google.com/books?id=2yAwAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA566&lpg=PA566&dq=manchester+bury+and+bolton+canal+and+rly+1831+1+%26+2+%22will+4%22&source=web&ots=s6Y7NnGBfb&sig=S0OS8KS7Flt35tBaX2DUcRiFC7o#PPA565,M1

http://books.google.com/books?id=W20DAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA480&dq=bolton+canal#PPA480,M1

http://books.google.com/books?id=KDktAAAAMAAJ&q=bury+canal&dq=bury+canal&pgis=1

0161 930 5813 mr kingham

a monk & co ltd - contractor for m62 - j16-j17

lancs road construction unit supervised?

[edit] WikiProject Greater Manchester

Hello, Parrot of Doom! Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's Greater Manchester-related articles. Given the interest we're assuming you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Greater Manchester? It's a user-group dedicated to improving the overall quality of all Greater Manchester-related content. There is a discussion page for sharing ideas as well as developing and getting tips on improving articles. The project has in-house specialists to support and facilitate your ideas. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We hope to be working with you in the future!

-- Jza84 · (talk) 00:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Parrot of Doom, and welcome to Wikiproject Greater Manchester! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a Greater Manchester Project Wikipedian! As a project we aim to have all our articles compliant with the various editing policies and guidelines. If you are contributing an article, it is good practice to ensure that it’s properly referenced with reliable sources, otherwise any contentious content may be removed by another editor. A good starting point for articles about settlements in Greater Manchester is the WP:UKCITIES guideline. If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your ideas. Again, welcome, and happy editing!

Hello, the above template is the standard welcome of the project, but wanted to make a personal welcome to you into the project too! Hopefully as a team we can get some of these canal articles upto the highest of standards. Don't forget you can add {{User WP Greater Manchester}} to your userpage to indicate your usership! We look forwards to working with you! -- Jza84 · (talk) 11:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pilkington's Lancastrian Pottery

Hi, just looked at your talk page and noticed you'd put up the the Pilkington's stub. I don't know much about it myself, other than where it is (I live just near the top of Rainsough) but I did recently find some web links and put them on the page. You may find them useful if you want to develop it a bit more. One of them is for the Pilkington's Lancastrian Pottery Society - maybe if you contacted them, someone would be willing to write something for the article. Richerman 22:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Cool thanks, I might try that. Trouble is most people are scared of Wikipedia :) Parrot of Doom 22:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

You could ask them to write something that you would put on for them. I would have thought they would be keen on a bit of free publicity for their society. Richerman 00:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WPGM Newsletter - November 2007

See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Greater Manchester/Newsletter/December 2007

The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter

The WikiProject Greater Manchester Newsletter Issue II - November 2007 Got any suggestions? - Add them here Member news The project now has 28 members! 7 new participants enrolled this week, they can be viewed here. There was also change to the welcoming messages this month, by Jza84, which reinvigorated the style in response to the change of colours on the main and affiliated pages. See the welcome templates, here. Finally, a barnstar has been created for the project! See the final design on this page, and so far it has been awarded to one lucky participants, WebHamster. Well done. Greater Manchester Article News Well has this month been a hub of activity, or what? (See:Original diff) The new assessment scale has been welcomed by many here at WPGM and as of 4th November, 81.37% of all 650 articles have been assessed with both importance and class. Two articles have been passed good article criteria since last delivery, they are: Didsbury & Dunham Massey. Well done to all involved. Current Debates There was a lengthy debate over a certain number of related articles in Manchester City Centre this week, (See:the thread involved). Aytoun Street, Barton Square, Brazenoose Sqaure, Dover Street, Manchester and Police Street were all flagged by Pit-yacker as being deserved of deletion per lacking notablilty. The process took 5 days at articles for deletion and the result was, delete. Other sections that readied editors into scrambling over themselves this month were: should Greater Manchester boroughs get their own infobox? Such as with London boroughs. The debate continutes. Monthly Challenges Same as last month, we've have to get Manchester upto Featured Article Standard. However, with Manchester now rated as A-Class (above GA and below FA) it may be easier than first thought. Try to fill all the current "to do" requirements. There has also been some talk of increased activity of bringing Greater Manchester to Good Article Standard. It would be ideal if all 650 articles were at least GA standard, but that will never happen in the next month. But please if you can, assess your ability to understand an article and if you're acquauinted with the task in hand and potentially long wait for a writing and for a review, go ahead! Be bold. Manchester Airport once again saw more vandal edits this month, and was protected for another consecutive month on 22nd October by Jmlk17. Some users have also realised the extreme coincidence in the first half of 65% of editing IPs, i.e. all begin with "79.72". Could it be the same editor? If you can keep visiting the page to revert vandalism in sight. The most freqeunt additions that are factually incorrect are the inclusions of: Chicago O'Hare and New York-JFK to Pakistan International Airlines (T2) and Newquay to Air Southwest (T3). MAN also has a peer review. Although you may not have noticed that this WikiProject has a associated portal. The page named, Portal:North West England, is updated frequently, but it would be nice to get more editors. It too has recently undergone a peer review, and some criteria has been added to get the page to featured portal status. You could signify your involvement by adding {{User Portal NWE}} to your userpage. Created by Rudget | Single-Page View

Rudget _{Contributions} 17:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Manchester Geographical Society

with your interest in canals I think you will find this interesting as it has a paper on the MBB canal. Also the paper on Urban floodplains and slopes has a fair bit about Clifton and the surrounding area. Richerman 19:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Paul Hindle is a member of the canal society and very knowledgeable about these things, I've referenced some of his work in the article :) Parrot of Doom 16:30, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Canals of Oldham

Hello Parrot of Doom!

I just wondered if you have any knowledge about canals and waterways in Oldham? I'm trying to push the Oldham article towards the good article standard and I'm keen to expand the "Transport" section a little. I know the Rochdale Canal passes through nearby Chadderton but I really have no idea about any others.

Do you have any pointers or advise? Hope so! -- Jza84 · (talk) 13:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. You could try a search on the Hollinwood Branch Canal, currently disused but has a society who are trying to get it restored. Parrot of Doom 16:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip!... It seems strange that a town of Oldham's size only had this one canal! However, I've added a note to the article about it none-the-less!

You mentioned something about meeting up to go through the MEN material. I've wondered if there should be a Manchester Meetup for the project at somepoint down the line anyway!... (there was one proposed last year)... though I'm not normally one to meet people over the net!!!! I suppose it depends on the avaliability of the volume as you say, as well as if any other of the Gtr Mcr project folks request any other editions.

If you do want to go ahead though, I'm available to e-mail via my userpage (look down the lefthand side of the page under the search box to the toolbox) where it says "E-mail this user". Hope that helps!... congrats on the Barnstar btw too! -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] For you...

		The Editor's Barnstar
		I noticed that nobody has awarded you with a barnstar yet! I think it is long overdue for all your work on Wikipedia and even your petition for information accessible to all and most of all your contributions to the Greater Manchester Project. └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 03:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Ooo thanks :) How do I put that in my profile? Parrot of Doom 13:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Just copy and paste it to where you want it. _└^and-rew_┘^┌_talk^┐ 18:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] December Newsletter, Issue III

The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter

The WikiProject Greater Manchester Newsletter Issue III - December 2007 Got any suggestions? - Add them here Member news The project now has 31 members. 3 new participants enrolled last month, they can be viewed here. Andrew has also created another template for your talk page (even though this links to your userpage) which displays for all to see that you are a member of the project. You can add it to your page by including {{WPGM Talk}} to the page. It may be difficult to see the true effects of these welcoming messages, but I'm estimating that since the introduction of these that 12 new users have joined, all 100% have accepted their invitations, and therefore they are 100% successful in their aim. Greater Manchester Article News Once again, the project has been subject to much praise from three newly promoted featured articles, and one more good article. Oldham (nom), Manchester (nom), M62 motorway (nom) and Chat Moss (review) have all passed with flying colours. Featured articles now make up 0.03% more of the overall articles that there are relating to the project, than last month. Of all 791 pages which are tagged with this template, 100% have been assessed with the new scale which was introduced last month. It may also be worth noting two others pages that are undergoing transformations are: List of companies based in Greater Manchester and Belle Vue Zoo. Current Debates There was a lengthy debate over Manchester Airport this month, which lead to three article for deletions, second nominations viewable here and deletion review viewable here. Basically, what happened was there was quite a great misunderstanding of what the purpose of the lists actually were. They were to compile a list of the destinations served by each terminal and linked along into a sub-page, where it would seem the overview page (i.e. Manchester Airport) would look less cluttered, as was the suggestion at the peer review. Some participants at the first AFD, stated that reviews shouldn't be carried out upon unless there is consensus, and as they are not authorative should only be used as a guide. It was soon sorted though and all three daughter-lists were deleted. There has also been a change to the projects aims, which took a dramatic overhaul this week following the FA pass of Manchester. The change was performed by Jza84. It is now recognised that we should bring not only top importance articles to FA standard but also ones that have been long-since reviewed, like Altrincham and Stretford. And if you're wondering why Salford is there it's due to the fact that there is a consensus among the project members that as Salford is in such close vicinity to the City of Manchester, that it's our "duty" to help promote it. The change came about about after this discussion. Monthly Challenges New this month, we have to get Greater Manchester upto Featured Article Standard. However, with Manchester now rated as FA-Class and the proposed "skipping" of the GA process, it may not be too long before we see this under the success section on the project mainpage. It would be ideal if all 791 articles were at least GA standard, but that will never happen in the next month! But please if you can, assess your ability to understand an article and if you're acquauinted with the task in hand and potentially long wait for a writing and for a review, go ahead! Be bold. The progress monitor can be seen here. Once again, Portal:North West England has been subject to much exposure on behalf of it's editors. The current status of the portal is looking good and it has so far gained unanimous support at it's FPOC. Hopefully, it'll be promoted and we'll have yet another success on our hands. Also, most major articles that are relevant have been tagged with a shortcut to the Portal mainpage, by Jza. And finally, have a Very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Created by Rudget | Single-Page View

[edit] WPGM help

I am having trouble with the "sign up as a participant" page. Can you help me? Basketball110 (talk) 22:54, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't get how to fill in the text that I copied onto the participants page. I ended up writing it in, but it didn't get in the table. My name is there, but there isn't the correct place. If you go to the participants page, you'll see what I mean. Basketball110 (talk) 02:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Basketball110 (talk) 02:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] January Newsletter, Issue IV

The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter

The WikiProject Greater Manchester Newsletter Issue IV - January 2008 Got any suggestions? - Add them here Member news Happy New Year to all our Greater Manchester Wikipedians! The project now has 34 members. 5 new participants enrolled last month, they can be viewed here. On behalf of the team I hope they have prosperous and enjoyable usership and wish them well with their forthcoming work! User:Archtransit and User:Rudget, both part of our team, are current candidates for adminship (see here for Archtransit and here for Rudget). We wish them luck with this persuit and hope they will become our latest project participants with admin status! Greater Manchester Article News Since our last newsletter delivered by User:Rudget on 03 December 2007, our teamship has continued to bear fruit in the form of obtaining featured article status for Chat Moss (nom). User:Malleus Fatuarum has been heavily involved with this article and we thank him for his efforts! It's a great addition to our FA family! In addition to Chat Moss, Altrincham (nom) is a current featured article candidate, whilst Trafford is a recent good article candidate. Simillarly, the Portal:North West England is now officially a featured portal. User:Rudget has been overwhelmingly involved with this portal and he too is hereby thanked on behalf of the project for his continued contributions to this page and many others. Following a title change this month (from city-wide to county-wide per this discussion) Grade I listed buildings in Greater Manchester has been one of the project's successes, albeit unofficially, with good collaboration and rapid rates of development. It is hoped by several users that this become a featured list in the short term. If you think you can help with images, information or just filling in the dead links, please feel free to join in! Simillar articles to undergo large transformation are List of churches in Greater Manchester, Kersal Moor and List of railway stations in Manchester, all of which are now in good shape. Current Debates There have been a number of debates this month, some of which with a high level of potential impact for the project and its members. Article assessment for the project became a point of contention when around 1400 articles were tagged by a bot. Most of these artcles were on "minor" association football players. The consensus was that in our state of around 30 participants and as a predominatly geography based project, most of these articles should be untagged, at very least for the time being. Of our 1403 articles now tagged however, only (?) 85% are assessed - a drop of 15%! Other debates have included the notability and verifiability of Commonwealth Black Pudding Throwing Championships and its mention on the Ramsbottom article. Whilst on Shaw and Crompton, one of our featured articles, questions have been raised as to what constitutes a "town". If you have any veiws on these matters, please feel free to share them at the project talk page. Perhaps one of the most notable debates this month was the possibility of... scrapping the project newsletter! User:Rudget has written the last three editions (that's all of them!) and has decided that he'd like to pass on the responsibility. It has been proposed that a noticeboard system be introduced to highlight new issues in a near(!)-realtime fashion. I User:Jza84 am writing what could now be the last GM newsletter for a while. If you're a member of the team, but aren't closely involved with the project, then we'd love to hear from you at WT:GM with your views on which system of communication is the right way forwards (if any/both!). Monthly Challenges As was stated in last months newsletter, the Greater Manchester remains a key article for the project, and one which has been identified as urgent in our quest for Featured Article status. Sadly, for all our other successes, Greater Manchester has changed little since this time last year] (!) and is still an article requiring expansion and development. The new WP:UKCOUNTIES guide may provide new ways in which to channel our efforts. Although we endevour to have good article status even for our suburbs and hamlets, other articles specifically identified as needing development towards FA include Salford, Stretford and Altrincham. Many of our most crucial articles about our largest towns are still in poor condition: Rochdale, Bury, Prestwich, Bolton, and Wigan are of "start class" standard - much lower than we should have. If you feel you can help, please be bold and try to improve these. One final challenge for this month is for all those with new digial cameras for Christmas, or even digial images stored away on a disc!... many of our place articles are still without a single photograph, and www.geograph.org.uk is running low on quality images. Even those with photographs often have a low quality photograph of the local church. MORE ARE NEEDED! Especially townscapes! If you think you can help, a barnstar is up for grabs for best picture added in the next month or so! We're always looking for potential new project members and ways for greater communication, collaboration and participation. WP:GM has a strong core of users, but would like to have more input from a wider user-base. If you can think of ways to improve our ways of working, please feel free to mention them at WT:GM. Simillarly, if you notice a new or unapproached user who is producing sound work related to Greater Manchester and its consituent parts, please don't forget to ask them if they'd like to join us, either in your own hand, or by adding {{Welcome WPGM}} to their talk page. Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome! Created by Jza84 based on a template by Rudget | Single-Page View

[edit] Notability of John Nightingale

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on John Nightingale, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because John Nightingale seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting John Nightingale, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 06:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Safe Speed revert [1]

You changed -

"While many road safety campaigns are registered charities or limited companies, Safe Speed is not, if it became a charity it would render it-self unable to be political. (see government requirements on becoming a charity)."

to

"While many road safety campaigns are registered charities or limited companies, Safe Speed is a political organisation and therefore does not pursue charity status due to government requirements."

without providing a reference. I reverted the change - [2] stating -

"Undid revision 188463526 by Parrot of Doom (talk). See Wikipedia:Citing sources"

You reverted my revert stating -

"Undid revision 188471970 not sure why you undid my revision, it certainly read better than the previous edits which were massively biased in favour of SafeSpeed.)"

The reason would have become clear had you read Wikipedia:Citing sources. Please explain why you think it doesn't apply in this case. To keep the conversation together, please reply here. -- John (Daytona2 · Talk · Contribs) 19:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

It isn't that the citing sources isn't relevant (heaven knows I've added enough requests for them to that article) but that the previous changes had basically turned a reasonably unbiased article into a mouthpiece for Safespeed. I have sympathies with their view but I didn't think the changes were at all fair, or grammatically well done, so I tidied things up - I would have preferred the line to have been modified to contain a request for a source, or deleted, not all my edits reverted. Parrot of Doom (talk) 02:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

OK maybe I was too trigger happy, my apologies. I saw a bald and potentially controversial statement and reacted. I disagree that the previous changes made it a mouthpiece for SS, but yes better integration could have been achieved. btw - on another point, the "(or better, half the distance)" is explained here [3] - "For single track roads and some overtaking you must be able to stop comfortably within half the distance that you know to be clear.". Do you have a reference for the "political organisation" statment ? -- John (Daytona2 · Talk · Contribs) 18:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't have a reference for the political organisation bit, I was just cleaning up material that user Safespeed had inserted. To be honest the entire article annoys me, it seems to be a place for people on either side to argue, rather than an unbiased article for your average reader to consume. I'm a member of the Safespeed forums but I try my best to outline both sides of the argument (I'm also a cyclist an a successful IAM examinee) Parrot of Doom (talk) 21:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Collieries

Thanks for your note, the problem here is that unlike the other coal fields, Lancashire had its own terminology. A colliery was a complex cosisting of one or more pits. The Mine Inspectors reports give the pit and only in odd cases the colliery (they give the owner of the pit instead). So the collieries you mention may well have their pits in my list. I will have to dig (pardon the pun) and find out which pits were at those collieries. BTW a mine in Lancashire was the the name given to a seam so a pit worked several mines (eg the Cannel, Five Foot or the Doe). Anyway you've given me something to think on.... take care Phil aka Geotek (talk) 19:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Grade II* listed buildings in Greater Manchester

There seems to be a bit of confusion over the Grade II and Grade II* buildings. 3 of the 4 buildings you added are in fact only Grade II (I've not checked the pack horse bridge). A good indicator of their status is to check a building's record on Images of England, although in some cases it is out of date and a source directly from the council would be good to double check. The IoE website is a bit confusing to begin with, but it helps if you know something about what you're looking for, such as the road name; for some reason it won't let you search all Grade II* LBs in Greater Manchester, that would make too much sense. Thanks for the effort, but just be a bit more careful next time. Nev1 (talk) 14:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually I've been using the Grade I page as a template for the Grade II* page. A Grade II page may be impractical as there are about 3,500 of them! Nev1 (talk) 15:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Clifton railway station

Ah, you beat me to it. I was going to add an image too, but taken from the platform looking back at the bridge. paypwip (talk) 18:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GM station pix

Hi! Only just noticed your note at the GM stations matrix at User:Hassocks5489/GM. At the moment, I have just included all stations currently in use within the GMPTE boundaries. Closed/disused stations may be something to think about longer-term. Cheers, Hassocks5489 (talk) 12:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hello again

Basketball110 _{will you sign?} ♣ has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of pies by adding {{subst:GivePie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Will the Greater Manchester newsletter continue? Basketball110 _{will you sign?} ♣ 16:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March Newsletter, Issue V

The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter

The WikiProject Greater Manchester Newsletter Issue V - March 2008 January issue Got any suggestions? -- Add them here Project News Since the January newsletter there has been an increase of 5 featured articles/lists, taking our total number of featured entries upto 16 17 (Trafford passed today!). Grade I listed buildings in Greater Manchester, reported on in the last newsletter, is now a featured list, and was one of the project's finest team efforts towards one of the finest such lists. The Grade II* listed buildings in Greater Manchester has since been started. Can you help? Trafford and List of tallest buildings and structures in Salford remain featured candidates, although both look likely to be promoted. UPDATE: Trafford was promoted today! Although WP:GM leads the way in terms of featured content by a local British project, the Kent and Yorkshire WikiProjects are close to this total, with 11 and 14 featured entries respectively. Following a somewhat frenzied collaboration at the start of March, and a nomination by User:Joshii, Greater Manchester was promoted to GA status. It's the first metropolitan county to obtain this recognition. There has otherwise been a reduction in WP:GM nominations for GA status, something which the project has begun to discuss on the talk page. Having completed all but one of our short term aims set last December, the project would like to look at developing new short term aims. Suggestions have been made here, but there is scope for flexibility. Do you have a entry you would like to see developed? Other articles to have undergone a major upgrading include Salford, Stalybridge, Middleton and List of railway stations in Greater Manchester. Member News There are now 39 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester! Welcome to the 8 new members that joined since our last newsletter: Polishname (talk · contribs) Jimet (talk · contribs) Phon123 (talk · contribs) Abfab27 (talk · contribs) Sharadjalota456 (talk · contribs) Mike Peel (talk · contribs) Unsy770 (talk · contribs) Hassocks5489 (talk · contribs) Two members have left the project however, each for rather different reasons: Archtransit (talk · contribs) was an administrator, and project member, who was found to have been abusing his editting and sysop privliges. Following investigation, Archtransit was banned indefinately. A report in The Signpost is found here. Rudget (talk · contribs), also an administrator, decided to leave the project. Reasons mentioned included the demands of admin duties taking over too much time. Rudget helped towards Didsbury's GA promotion, and Portal:North West England's FP promotion. Thanks This WikiProject, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! Roll Call!!! Are YOU still around? WP:GM is a great project, and is leading the way for local WikiProjects of the UK. However, though the project talk page is a hub of activity, it is regularly used by only a core of 5-6 editors, which isn't making the most of its potential. Indeed, a study, by the University of Minnesota found that "One-tenth of 1 percent of editors account for nearly half of Wikipedia's content value". We at WP:GM do not want to follow suit! There are several editors who have, sadly, not editted since the turn of 2008, and others, which concentrate in areas other than Greater Manchester material (which is quite fine!). The WikiProject Greater Manchester would like to know if YOU are still around, and if so, if you've like to be more involved, and, if not, why not and what can we do to get you involved and be a bigger part of the team? Feel free to come by the project talk page and leave us a message on what you're working on and/or what you'd like to see improved. The project is only as strong as its members and we'd like to know if you're still active or if we can help you with your editting. Images A picture's worth a thousand words In our last issue, a plea was made for more images to be submitted to Wikipedia/WikiCommons to improve the quality and context of our articles. Many of our Top priority articles are still lacking in quality images, if any! www.geograph.org.uk is an online resource of photographs of places in the UK, which we can use. Www.flickr.com also has some images we are permitted to use. Do you have a digital camera however? Can you take photographs of townscapes and landmarks in your local area that can be used here? Middleton, Hulme and Rochdale all have examples of images in their lead that help give a sense of place and improve the context to our readers. Simillarly, many of our most crucial articles about our largest towns are still in poor condition: Stockport, Bury, Prestwich, Bolton, and Wigan are of "start class" standard with short lead sections and unreferenced sections - a much lower standard than we should allow! If you feel you can help, please be bold and try to improve these. There is a list of resources that can help. Created by Jza84 | Single-Page View Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome!

[edit] Re: camera

Sure; I can probably call round there either Thursday evening or over the weekend. The only problem is, I can't see where the canal is on that image. I know that there's a bit of canal at the river, just to the side of the Water Street bridge, but I can't see it any further north than that... Mike Peel (talk) 10:12, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay: photos are at [4]. I'll try to keep revisiting the site, taking more / better photos. Mike Peel (talk) 21:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:GM Newsletter

The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter

The WikiProject Greater Manchester Newsletter Issue VI - April 2008 March issue Got any suggestions? — Add them here Project News Since the last newsletter in March, our number of featured articles/lists has increased by 3, giving us a total of 21! List of tallest buildings and structures in Salford and Manchester City F.C. seasons were promoted to featured list status on 22 March along with Castles in Greater Manchester which passed FLC on 1 April. Well done to all those who contributed! Peterloo Massacre was nominated for FAC on 6 April. So far it has received support for FAS but feel free join the discussion here. The reduction of WP:GM GAs, mentioned in the last issue, has been tackled with Buckton Castle and Oasis (band) being passed on 9 March and Upper Brook Street Chapel, Manchester on 7 April. We now have 13 GAs due to hard work of our contributors. Well done! Hulme Arch Bridge was nominated for GAS on March 30. WP:GM still is still the leading local British WikiProject. As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 6 on London and Yorkshire who have 15 FAs each. Although taking the lead in FAs, WP:GM is still lacking GAs and falls behind London by 6. This topic was at the front of the new aims discussion (here) and is an important issue for WP:GM. As mentioned above, new aims have been decided. See the right hand column for more details. Member News There are now 44 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester! A warm welcome to the 5 new members that have joined us since March: Attenboroughp (talk · contribs) Paypwip (talk · contribs) Liquidswords (talk · contribs) Azallen (talk · contribs) Man2 (talk · contribs) No users left the WikiProject this month. Hooray! Thanks A big "thank you" to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed. Written by Polishname • Template by Jza84 | Single-Page View Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome! New Aims The completion of all but one of the short term aims set last December resulted in a discussion on WT:GM to set new aims for the WikiProject. They are: Obtain FA status for Greater Manchester. Obtain GA status for Salford. Obtain GA status for Kersal Moor. Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county. Obtain FL status for List of railway stations in Greater Manchester. Obtain GA -> FA status for Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine. Obtain FL status for List of people from Bolton. Obtain GA status for a third of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs. It took us four months to get our last aims completed, why not try and see if these can be done in less time than before! All input is welcome but if anyone has any books or photos etc specifically related to these topics, they would be extra-specially welcome. But before rushing ahead with these new aims, let's not forget the one that got away last time: to obtain B -> GA status for Rochdale, Wigan, Bury, Bolton and Stockport. Most of these articles are in poor condition and in need of repair. Good quality images are urgently needed also. Let's make sure that this aim doesn't stay off our radar much longer. Don't Forget... Images! The shortage of good images was mentioned in the last issue and still hasn't been resolved! A good place to start would be the requested photographs category but please remember that there are many articles not within this category that have the same need in common. Assessment "Assess and review all relevant articles for quality, importance and progress" is one of our mid-term aims. At the present moment, there are only 43 unassessed articles. This task could be completed well before the next newsletter is out. Last but not Least... Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion and the list of articles needing cleanup are in permanent need of attention. Please take a look and see what you can do.

[edit] Kearsley Power Station and Stoneclough Photos

Hi there I added some text to the Kearsley Power Station page that I've referenced from a local history book I have on the area.

Also thanks for adding the pictures to the Stoneclough page, I've been meaning to add some more and your one of the stocks is great. I have a question about the 'Pack horse bridge' photo on there though, do you mean that to be a photo of the bridge in Ringley or a photo of the bridge at nob end? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamman (talk • contribs) 16:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter

The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter

The WikiProject Greater Manchester Newsletter Issue VII - May 2008 April issue Got any suggestions? — Add them here Project News The Peterloo Massacre article was promoted to FA on 12 April. One of our top priority articles, it had previously been only start class. The process began on 25th March and since then underwent over 700 edits before the end of April, with Jza84, Malleus Fatuarum, and Richerman making significant contributions to the rapid development of the article. Ddstretch and Mr Stephen also contributed to discussions on the article talk page. Hulme Arch Bridge was promoted to GA. This was mainly the effort of Mike Peel who was also largely responsible for the promotion of Upper Brook Street Chapel, Manchester last month. Perhaps the most unusual event of April 2008 for the project has surrounded the Denshaw article. Denshaw is a village of about 500 people in Saddleworth, Oldham, which attracted media attention due to vandalism of the stub class article. Once this was brought to the project's attention, efforts were made to improve the article which led to a successful DYK? nomination and might even advance it to GA status with a bit more effort. In April there were over 19,000 visitors who saw the project in action. Contributors included Jza84, Ddstretch, Malleus Fatuarum, Hassocks5489, Nev1 and Mike Peel. Also this month 5 articles featured on the DYK? section of the front page: Hulme Arch Bridge, Peterloo Massacre, Bolton and Leigh Railway, Barnes Hospital, Denshaw, and Platt Fields Park. This certainly puts into perspective one of the project's previous mid-term aims "feature on the Did you know? section with at least three articles related to Greater Manchester". If you've expanded an article 5 fold or started one with at least 1.5kb of prose in the past 5 days and it has an interesting and referenced fact don't hesitate to read the conditions of DYK? and nominate it here. It gets the project noticed! WikiProject Greater Manchester is still leading local British WikiProjects. As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 7 on London and Yorkshire who have 15 Featured Articles each. Although taking the lead in FAs, WP:GM is still lacking GAs and falls behind London by 6 (we have 14, London 20). If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC! Member News There are 45 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester. One new member has joined the project this month: Kieran5676 on 30th April and is interested in south Manchester. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}. Thanks A rather large "thank you" goes out to all the editors who edited article related to Greater Manchester, or who edit the project itself. It's no joke. Written by Basketball110 and Nev1 • Template by Jza84 | Single-Page View Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome! New Aims Last month the project set new and ambitious aims for itself: Obtain FA status for Greater Manchester. Obtain GA status for Salford. Obtain GA status for Kersal Moor. Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county. Obtain FL status for List of railway stations in Greater Manchester. Obtain GA and/or FA status for Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine. Obtain FL status for List of people from Bolton. Obtain GA status for one third (1/3) of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs. It took us four months to get our last aims completed, why not try and see if these can be done in less time than before! All input is welcome but if anyone has any books or photos etc specifically related to these topics, they would be extra-specially welcome. Most of the articles covered by our new aims haven't experienced much activity in the past month, if you thing you can help improve an article be bold and get editing. Articles such as List of people from Bolton and List of railway stations in Greater Manchester already appear very close to FL status and may just require an editor to guide them through the FLC process. Our highest priority article is of course Greater Manchester, there is a peer review from March with issues still to be addressed before it can be put forward as a featured article candidate. Salford is another top priority article because it's the county's second city; it's under gone a lot of editing but still has a way to go before it reaches GA. Also active this month has been the City of Salford article – part of our aim to get 1/3 of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs to GA &ndash. Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable. Reminders... Images! The rate of good images has gone up since it was mentioned in the last issue, but more images are needed! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images. Assessment When this section was written, there was only 1 unassessed article! This task has probably already been finished, but it might now have. To check click here. Last but not Least... Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion and the list of articles needing cleanup are in permanent need of attention. Please take a look and see what you can do.

[edit] Canal Icons

Hi, I have moved nearly all of the Icons for canal descriptions from en:Wikipedia to Commons, but am left with ugWBRUCKE, which is one of yours. The umlaut screws up Commons helper, and so I wondered if you would mind uploading it to Commons, as all the licencing gets tricky if I do it. Thanks. Bob1960evens (talk) 14:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June Newsletter, Issue VIII

The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter

The WikiProject Greater Manchester Newsletter Issue VIII - June 2008 May issue Got any suggestions? — Add them here Project News No FA news this month... but lots of GA! Old Trafford, Murrays' Mills and 1990 Strangeways Prison riot all passed GAC last month! In previous newsletters, the issue of WP:GM's lack of GAs has been raised numerously, so a large 'well done' to all those who contributed, be it little or large! Also, Milnrow and City of Salford have been nominated at WP:GAC. Feel free to join in with their discussions here and here respectively. To 'obtain GA status for a third of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs' is one of WP:GM's short-term aims, let's hope the City of Salford won't be the last borough with this status. In other news, the Grade II* listed buildings in Greater Manchester list has been coming along nicely and may even soon reach FLC! Please help out where you can. Well done to Mike Peel for getting Platt Fields Park onto the DYK! WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 8 on London! Although taking the lead in FAs, WP:GM is still flagging a little in GAs and falls behind London by 3. This is the closest we have ever got to taking the lead in local British GAs, if you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC! And don't forget that the Manchester congestion charge article will need all input possible to keep it up to date with the government's new legislation (grumble grumble)... Member News There are 46 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester. Our newest member is: James50567 - a warm welcome from us all! Let's not forget that Jza84 became an administrator this month! Congratulations on your new role. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}. Thanks A rather large "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.. Written by Polishname • Template by Jza84 | Single-Page View Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome! Aims The short-terms aims for the WikiProject are: Obtain FA status for Greater Manchester. Obtain GA status for Salford. Obtain GA status for Kersal Moor. Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county. Obtain FL status for List of railway stations in Greater Manchester. Obtain GA and/or FA status for Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine. Obtain FL status for List of people from Bolton. Obtain GA status for one third of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs. Most of the articles covered by our new aims haven't experienced much activity in the past month, except for City of Salford being nominated at WP:GAC. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Articles such as List of people from Bolton and List of railway stations in Greater Manchester already appear very close to FL status and may just require an editor to guide them through the FLC process. Greater Manchester is, of course, our highest priority article. Mr Stephen posted some milestones to getting this article up to FA status a while back. Please check them out and see what you can do. Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable. Reminders... Images! The rate of good images has gone up since it was mentioned in the last issue, but we'll need more if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images. Assessment As of 12th April, we have had 100% of our articles assessed for quality! Even so, we still 151 of our 1551 article unassessed for importance. Please take a look and see what you can do. Last but not Least... Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion and the list of articles needing cleanup are in permanent need of attention.