User talk:Robertvan1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
/Archive 1

Contents

[edit] Kennett etc

Robert, I just saw your name as someone who weas redoing templates. Well done. I reviewed the school and al;though not GA it is a B. I say you had played with colours in tables and had also tried to put a graph in. I have just returned from my hols near Beauvoisin, I did a quick review of the poor page and found a graph on the italian page which is pure html .... care to investigate? Your graph might improve in html? Victuallers 19:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ==Template:Schools in Berkshire==

You moved Mary Hare Grammar School into the independent school section. Even though it's non-maintained, it is still a state school. Surely this means it should be in the grammar school section? robertvan1 18:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


sorry if I'm breaking etiquette by copying your message - but on occasions when I've browsed people's talk pages I find it very hard to follow one side of a discussion! Hopefully by including both sides, we can make this easy to follow for anyone who wants
I'd refer you to the Mary Hare website, specifically http://www.maryhare.org.uk/?id=about_secondary, which tells us 'Mary Hare School is a non-maintained special school with charitable status. We have 220 pupils from all over the UK. The pupils' fees are paid by their Local Education Authority.' So it's not a state school. It's a charity - and as such, it's independent. I can see that if all pupils have their fees paid by their LEA that it is like a state school - but it still isn't one!
If you're not comfortable with this, maybe this debate would sit better on the Schools in Berkshire talkpage? That way, more editors could give their opinion.

Cheers Grblundell 19:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

you wrote
The school's page shouldn't be taken as correct, the [{Department for Children, Schools and Families]] lists the school as such: [1] and directgov lists it as scuch: [2]. On the DCSF site, it states clearly 'IND' on the list and directgov states 'State, special school, non-maintained special'. I believe that the DCSF and directgov are both government related and more reliable sources that the school's own website, do you disagree? robertvan1 20:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
There's some interesting points here. Most importantly, having looked at the directgov page, I accept that that describes the school as 'state'. If you'd like to move Mary Hare back to the state lists on that evidence I think that it's a defendable position.
But to pick up your (rhetorical?) question - personally, I would choose to believe an organisation's own website over a government one on a question of documentable fact. In general, the closer a source we reference is to the fact, the more likely I would think it is to be right. The Mary Hare website is about one secondary school. The government sites aggregate information about every secondary school in the country. Purely in terms of typing mistakes, I would expect there to be more errors on the government sites - and I would suggest that there will be other errors resulting from the information being passed through many people before appeaing on the website.
I also think that you may have misinterpreted the DCSF website - I can see nothing on the page that describes it as 'state' (and I can't find the 'IND' reference you quote - I assume that this is a typo by you, as surely 'IND' would suggest independent?). The top line describes the school as being in West Berks LEA - but if you refer to the Eton College page, that is described as being in Windsor & Maidenhead LEA. Given that Eton is (AFAIK) still independent, I conclude that that line is purely a geographical statement.
None the less, thanks for doing the legwork to put this fact right - given that it's in a template on multiple pages, it is at least as important as anything else on wikipedia to be right! Grblundell 20:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph Rowntree Foundation

? Ok to removed the "Wikify" template from the jrf article now? Vernon White - T A L K . . . to me. 20:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Font size

I happened to see your question in User talk:Victuallers (that's how wiki works). To increase font size, use <big>text</big> ; thus - text. Similarly, to use small text substitute "small" for "big". --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 10:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

No, it doesn't work in that context, does it? I'm working on it. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 19:43, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Using AWB

Hi. I have a small note. Per WP:AWB#Rules_of_use, edits like this should not be saved, as they accomplish nothing of substance and obscure watchlists and recent changes. Just a note. :) You can reply here. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, edits like this do Wikipedia a dis-service I believe, since the article is no longer in any category. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Yea sorry about that, I think I clicked save by accident on that one, and there was no point in rolling it back. As for the uncategorised one, bots regularly patrol articles and add need category templates, so that one would've been found soon enough. robertvan1 22:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Still, it is preferrable to have {{sports-stub}} rather than nothing at all, I think. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 06:41, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Yea OK, I'll keep that in mind while editing. robertvan1 15:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AWB, or just deleted stub

Just a note, this edit appears to have just deleted a stub tag (that I agree was in appropriate), but did you need AWB to do that. Also, I don't think the text, "clean up (sic) using AWB" was the best description of what you did. Pdbailey 00:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Controversies category

Category:Controversies has been restored. --Jagz 19:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Kennet.jpeg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Scotter school

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Scotter school, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. B. Wolterding 17:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I have no problem with this.  robertvan1  talk  21:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mass category removal

Hey, I noticed that you were able to do mass category removal from the page history of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. There is an anonymous IP adding the deleted category Category:Post-credits scene films to quite a few pages. I started to removed it manually, but I was wondering if you could use the AWB to take care of it or at least tell me how it would work so I can clean up. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:46, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kennet School

Take a look please. CR7 (message me) 21:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:AcademLink.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:AcademLink.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)