User talk:Steven (Editor)

Belated Welcome!

Hello, Steven (Editor), and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like it here! Here are a few important links for newcomers:

Wikipedia:Reliable sources, Wikipedia:CITE, WP:V and WP:NPOV
How to edit a page; How to develop articles; Editing tutorial
Manual of Style; Writing better articles
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Editing by consensus – working well with other Wikipedians

If you'd like some help with editing or otherwise, you can sign up at the new users log, post a question at the Help Desk, or ask me on my talk page.

Please sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. It is a good idea to read the most recent entries at the bottom of the Talk page of an existing article before making major changes to it, to see if your proposed change has been discussed before. Before I make a major change to an article, I often make a proposal on the Talk page to see if anyone minds.

Again, welcome! -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:40, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Steven (Editor), you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Steven (Editor)! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like ChamithN (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 21:02, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Possible conflict of interest

Hello, Steven (Editor). We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article BT Group, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
• instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. These concerns apply to your editing of BT Group and related BT companies and products. Edwardx (talk) 22:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Edwardx Hi Edward, thanks for leaving me a message. I've been focussing on BT Group and it's products and services at the moment, hope that is ok with you? Just sorting out some of the articles, I've added further history to BT Group with references and have created a BT MyDonate page. The Wholesale Broadband Connect and IPstream are two products provided by BT Wholesale, and I don't think it would be suitable for them to have their own articles on Wikipedia. I decided to set up a redirect and copy the content on these two articles and paste them within BT Wholesale. The contents of these two articles have no references and I didn't write them. All the content I've added so far on Wikipedia are only written with reliable references cited, such as BBC News and The Telegraph and so on. I don't have COI haha, I would appreciate if you could remove it - thanks Edward :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 02:41, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt reply, Steven (Editor). You have added some useful content, and good referencing using reliable sources is always appreciated. You state that you don't have a conflict of interest, but your pattern of contributions is typical of such an editor. Others may well reach the same conclusion. And if you really don't have any COI issues, why would you want me to remove that notice? Edwardx (talk) 12:00, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for replying Edwardx and that's a good point. Please leave this notice as it will be good for others to see that someone has mentioned possible COI and they will be able to see my response too. I'm not earning any money for the contributions I make on Wikipedia - would be awesome if I did, but I'm just doing this as part of my free time :)

Hi, Steven. Thanks for your contributions. The Wikipedia community discourages paid contributions to this encyclopedia, or any contributions where the person editing has a close relationship with the subject of the article. Better to put the info on the article's Talk page and let other editors insert it into the article if they think it conforms to our content policies and guidelines. This is supposed to be a neutral, dispassionate source of information for the public. Please see WP:PROMO and, generally, WP:NOT. Happy editing, -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ssilvers, you're welcome :) - don't worry, I'm not being paid for any contributions I make on Wikipedia, everything I do is voluntary - helps me to use my brain more when it comes to editing ha-ha, as well as making sure I'm citing reliable sources. Sometimes when it comes to editing an article on Wikipedia I tend to focus on it, adding any other information possible and relevant :P - Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:35, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Do bear in mind that a conflict of interest is NOT limited just to contributions that you are paid for. Could I respectfully suggest that you read our COI policy again, and make a more fulsome declaration. Edwardx (talk) 18:52, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Edwardx, I know and by the way I don't work for BT either and the last time I edited a BT article was in September. I'm now working here and then on other articles. Steven (Editor) (talk) 20:03, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Winsford Academy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amalgamation. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

DPL bot Thanks bot, sorted :D

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Steven (Editor), and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to The Winsford Academy has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 02:01, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Diannaa What have you done?! Thank you very much, I am aware of all of this! I'm still working on the Wiki page... Would you like to write the history of the school?

Hi Steven (Editor). Unfortunately, because your edits have been erased from view I don't know how you can get back a copy of the article before it was changed. You will have to ask an Administrator if it is possible, but as it has been deemed a copyright violation i'm not sure if they would be willing to do that. I appreciate you were working on the article as you went along. And I know you are a good faith editor. But its important that you don't save information on articles until you have made sure it doesn't break copyright. A way to do this would be to create your own Sandbox where you can create a raw copy of an article and work on it in your own time until its ready to save onto 'real' Wikipedia. Good luck! Bleaney (talk) 18:39, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Bleaney, I'm doing all of this in my free time. It did take me a long time having to gather all of the information and the many news articles I found really helped to build up the history. Rather than having to go through the pain of getting in contact with the Administrator and whether they'll be able to revert the edits or not, I'm just going to do it all again, here we go again haha. I'm doing of all of this as no one has seemed to written any history of this school, so I've decided to do it. Take care and thanks again :) - Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:54, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Woodford Lodge High School - Aerial View & Site Outline.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Woodford Lodge High School - Aerial View & Site Outline.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:08, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Redirect

No sorry, redirects are not about being a correct name its about redirecting to the right article, whatever someone types in it should take them to the right place. Bleaney (talk) 13:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah okay, thanks for letting me know Bleaney :) - Steven (Editor) (talk) 03:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Arthur Sullivan

Hello. Thanks for the edit about The Winsford Academy, but I removed the information from Sullivan's article. You did not cite a WP:Reliable source for the information. See WP:V. I searched Google for a source discussing this matter but did not find one. The School's website shows that a house is called "Sullivan", but it does not explain the connection with the composer, and I do not see any independent sources that mention it. So, even though I believe that the House is named for Sullivan, I don't think the information is noteworthy, in an encyclopedic sense, with respect to Sullivan, although it is of more interest in the school's article. If you disagree, please open a discussion about the matter on the talk page: Talk:Arthur Sullivan. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:40, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ssilvers, thank you for letting me know about this - the school's website did mention this, but now I'm unable to find this information too. If I can find a WP:Reliable source, I will let you know :) - Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:41, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Steven (Editor). 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)

Replaceable fair use File:Woodford Lodge High School - Aerial View & Site Outline.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Woodford Lodge High School - Aerial View & Site Outline.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 23:25, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Steven (Editor). Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Talk:The Winsford Academy

Hi. Thank you for your work on this article. As you have taken this article under your wing, perhaps you might like to remove the copright violations - I'm not saying you inserted them. Details are on the article talk page. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:44, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Kudpung Hi, you're welcome and thanks for getting in touch and for letting me know about this. I'll respond to you regarding this on the article talk page :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 21:33, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I have left some more comments on the article talk page. As there is often a lot of misunderstanding about article ratings and what they are for, you may wish to read WP:COUNCIL/AFAQ Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Winsford Academy New Build - First Steel Column Installation (23 June 2012).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Winsford Academy New Build - First Steel Column Installation (23 June 2012).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:46, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Winsford Academy New Build - Groundworks (25 May 2012).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Winsford Academy New Build - Groundworks (25 May 2012).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Winsford Academy New Build - Post Markings (14 March 2012).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Winsford Academy New Build - Post Markings (14 March 2012).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:48, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Winsford Academy New Build and Verdin - Commemorative Mob (16 July 2013).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Winsford Academy New Build and Verdin - Commemorative Mob (16 July 2013).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:49, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

January 2018

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Template talk:Infobox school, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Steven, I reverted your last edit on the above page. You made an edit request there yesterday and were instructed to establish consensus prior to making an edit request. Yet you made another edit request. Some points:

1. Are you even sure what you are requesting is possible? Are you familiar with Java and Lua?
2. Wait until someone responds to your initial posting.
3. Regarding your initial posting, it may be better to just remove it and go forward one item at a time. It's near impossible to establish consensus for a laundry list of changes. Try one at a time.
4. Honestly, few editors follow UK schools closely. The other project coordinator besides myself, Kudpung and Clem Rutter are two who do. My best advice would be for you to remove your initial post where you proposed changes, look at the edit history of the template itself and enquire of one of the template editors listed there as to the feasibility of what you are asking and then procede to discussing each item on the talk page, pinging the two editors I've indicated. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 02:19, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi John from Idegon, yes, I'm aware that I made an edit request yesterday and were instructed to establish consensus. As I don't have much experience with this aspect of Wikipedia, I approached the Wikipedia chat room to ask someone what I should do regarding the consensus as I really think those changes made would be a good idea. They told me that I could do a request for comment (RFC). It would be good if one of you (Kudpung, Tedder) could help me out. If you have a look and compare both of the infoboxes, which one do you think is better? The Infobox school has headings that keeps it organised and more fields/parameters that would also be applicable to UK schools. It looks like UK schools are left out, they get the less-developed infobox. Plus, why should UK schools have its own infobox, when there is one that's comprehensive and acts as more of a 'standard' template for schools? Steven (Editor) (talk) 03:45, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I was under the impression that the UK school infobox had been depricated, but I'm not certain. In any case, RfC is the last stop in forming a consensus, not the first. I deal more with North American schools, so I'll leave this for Kudpung. Just remember, everyone is a volunteer, and patience is a virtue. There are no WP:DEADLINEs here. John from Idegon (talk) 04:14, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I came here from the template's talk page. You probably don't need an RfC to add fields to the infobox, especially since this isn't going to measurably affect any existing uses of the template (and some of your requests are just to update outdated information). Not a lot of people care about these things, so if you ask on the talk page and a few people say they don't mind it should be fine. I think your changes would be okay but you would need to test them to see if they are feasible first. Edit request templates are supposed to be used only when you've actually written what you want to add or remove from a page. If you want to merge the two templates, you can, in no particular order,

• make your proposed changes to Template:Infobox school/sandbox;
• nominate Template:Infobox UK school for merging at WP:TfD (for unprotected pages you may want to do this using Twinkle, but you will have to make an edit request to add the banner templates to the pages or ask an editor with TPE to nominate the template);
• make an edit request to merge the changes from the sandbox into main template.

If the TfM succeeds then you or another editor can

• convert Template:Infobox UK school into a wrapper for the other template, testing changes in the sandbox first and then making edit requests;
• substitute all uses of the template by adding the template to the list at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force and adding the category Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted to the template's documentation page;
• nominate the template for speedy deletion (you could use Twinkle here as well but you will probably have to make an edit request).

@John from Idegon: For the record, none of the proposed changes should require Java (or JavaScript) or Lua, since they're relatively benign. They will probably require the use of parser functions, though. Jc86035 (talk) 04:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Jc86035. You do realize that there's a better chance I'll learn to do self service brain surgery than understand what you wrote, ya? John from Idegon (talk) 04:47, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

​ No problem. It's a bit arcane, but it's not too difficult to learn (I hope), and if Steven wants to merge the templates himself it's basically impossible to avoid the process anyway, since both templates are template-protected. Jc86035 (talk) 04:53, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

• The place to be having this discussion is at Template talk:Infobox UK school where it was started so that the regular editors who maintain it such as Kanguole, Keith D, and Pigsonthewing are aware and can chime in. That said, very few new articles about UK schools are being created nowadays, the template UK schools serves us well as it is, or at least on all the UK school articles I've created or watch over, and I personally believe we are discussing a solution that's looking for a problem. IMO, there's a tendency to include too much info in infoboxes anyway - e.g. Hanley Castle High School and Malvern College are about right. Due to the significant differences in education systems and terminology, there is a clear requirement for school infoboxes by country/region. Pinging John from Idegon. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:46, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jc86035, Kudpung and John from Idegon (sorry for this very long response), I genuinely think merging Infobox UK school into Infobox school would be the appropriate thing to do, or Kudpung, if you want to keep the UK one, at least if the fields/parameters I mentioned on Infobox school template talk page should be copied from the UK one, then UK school articles can also use the Infobox school template too, which acts as a 'standard' school template. But as these fields/parameters are the only ones missing, there wouldn't really be any need to have an Infobox UK school template, and the rest of the fields/parameters on the UK template are already there. This is why a merge would make sense. Kudping, you said "there is a clear requirement for school infoboxes by country/region", well Infobox school template is already being used for schools in other countries, and if it was to be split and school infoboxes developed for each country, I think this would eventually cause a mess plus more infobox school templates to maintain. I can see that 11 infobox school-related templates were merged into Infobox school (I'm aware the majority were American-related). But why does the UK have its own? It is evident that the Infobox school template is better and if you look at them side-by-side, you'll see; its design and fields/parameters are also applicable to UK schools. When adding the Infobox school template to a UK school article, only the parameters applicable to UK schools would be used (already applies to schools in other countries using this template). So what's the best thing that I should do, because I really want (hope) the templates to be merged or if not, at least add the missing UK fields/parameters I mentioned to the Infobox school template. I had a look at the TfD, the second reason under 'reasons to delete a template' is "The template is redundant to a better-designed template". In this case, the Infobox school template is the better-designed, it just lacks the fields/parameters I mentioned that would allow the template to better-suit UK school articles. I can see that short discussions regarding a merge were previously discussed; one over 10 years ago and another 2 years ago, but I think at these times, the Infobox school template was not as well developed as it is now. In some cases, consolidation can be a good thing and the majority of the fields/parameters in the Infobox school template are generic to schools around the world. What do you think? Steven (Editor) (talk) 00:25, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea but I'm not sure since I don't edit much in that topic area. Jc86035 (talk) 03:56, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:The Winsford Academy New Build - CGI Elevated Rear Corner View (8 December 2011).png

Thank you for uploading File:The Winsford Academy New Build - CGI Elevated Rear Corner View (8 December 2011).png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:

• File:The Winsford Academy New Build - Scale Model (8 December 2011).png
• File:The Winsford Academy New Build - Site Plan (3 February 2012).png
• File:The Winsford Academy New Build - Under Construction Aerial View (11 September 2012).png
• File:The Winsford E-ACT Academy Logo.png
• File:Woodford Lodge High School - Aerial View with Site Outline.png

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Alumni

I have checked the referencing of two of you alumni. You have to be careful on this one- your last footballer still needs a reference, as the school is not mentioned in a referenced section of his article- or indeed at all. The MP you quote, does not stand, it does have a back link to the school in his early life section, but as this section is not referenced you śhould just as a {{cn}} tag to that article.

I would concentrate on removing extraneous material before you add more. I have had a look at Curriculum section, and checked what I could find on the website to explain what they do. They do need to maintain it! Have a look at Abraham Moss Community School to see one way of adding Curriculum Statement, Keystage 3, Keystage 4, Sixthform. (No I am not happy with that) or look at Fortismere School#Curriculum which achieves the task of explaining the nuances of the curriculum for a reader who has never visited the UK, and in sufficient depth for a potential parent.

When you have a moment could you add a few words about yourself on your user page- so we know who we are talking to, and which Wikimeetup to invite you to. --ClemRutter (talk) 21:26, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

@ClemRutter: Hi, thanks for letting me know about this. For the footballer, I'll see if I can find a reference. You know for Sam Bell which I have listed. He's also an actor and starred in the 2009 film, Nowhere Boy - should I mention this in the notable alumni section? It is also mentioned on IMDb. For the MP, I've found these which can be used as references: 1, 2, 3 - should I add these to the MP's article instead? There is still a lot of work needed on the article. Worked a lot on the article though, what it used to look like before was terrible, lack of reliable references, some of the information was incorrect and no mention of its history dating back to 1895. You know the sixth form, are you referring to the text in the history section on the suspend of sixth form provision? There was a Sixth Form section, but this was removed by another editor when the school suspended its sixth form. Also, the sixth form text in the history section shows the school had reverted to being an 11-16 school.

Another thing, the images on the article have been tagged as failing NFCC#8, but these images are essential to the article and I don't really think they do fail it. Plus, both the Verdin and Woodford buildings have been demolished. Google Map's Street View and Satellite imagery have also been updated and no longer shows these buildings. The Woodford Lodge site is undergoing a housing development and where the former Verdin building was, there's now a new £20 million school building and its site has changed, including a new 3G floodlit all-weather pitch. There were more images which have since been removed, but these were tagged with the same reason but by a different editor, but this made sense. Any ideas what I can do? Don't think I've ever edited my user page, just left it as it is haha. I'll have a look at this when I can. Please let me know, thank you :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 22:34, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

ENGVAR in templates

Seeing that you are working on the {{Infobox school}} templates, I want to point to this WP:ENGVAR solution: inside the template, one can use {{engvar}} to enter two or more regional spellings, then an article editor can add |engvar=en-UK and all variants are switched to the UK spelling. (See its documentation). Example: {{Infobox drug}} has licenCe/licenSe. HTH. - DePiep (talk) 09:36, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Promod R. Chaudhury

Thank you for the mgs. I will look after for such error while creating article further. But it is important to note that it was not a copy paste article at all. I have made it after going through proper references and my creation is more informative than earlier one. Unfortunately I was total unawer that someone created it already. :) Thanx again. keep helping Pinakpani (talk) 06:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Pinakpani: some of the text in both articles look almost the same rather than copy and paste. It would be good if you are looking to create a new article that you search on Wikipedia first to see if it already exists. What should have been done is the existing article should have been 'moved' to the correctly named title and then expanded on with references added, plus any other changes that may be required. That way, the page history would stay together in one place. However, it may have been difficult as the one that already exists is misspelt and the one you created, which is better with structure and some references, is spelt correctly. I have copied the infobox over from the existing one to your one, and made a few alterations and additions to it based on the content in your one. But don't worry, we all make mistakes and it's all good :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:10, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Dear, @Steven (Editor): Just saw that you have made a link that page with Srilanka related article! I dont know how this person is related with it, Can you explain? So far as I know he was a Bengali revolutionary died in British India, having no connection with Srilanka. But other three links are absolutely correct. Thank you Pinakpani (talk) 06:32, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Pinakpani: I was going through the pages that were linked to the incorrectly titled Promode one and changing them to your one. Yeah I saw this too and found it a bit odd, but at the time, I was unsure if I should remove it or not, as there may have been a reason as to why someone added it to that article in the first place. But I’ve removed it now anyway Steven (Editor) (talk) 11:27, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:23, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:32, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Don Bosco Higher Secondary School, Irinjalakuda

This issue isn't worth wasting more time, but don't you find it absurd that an entire article has no citations at all, and the single fact which has citation is an alumni, and that this fact has not one but two citations, one of which is not only redundant in the sense that it does not verify anything which isn't already verified by the other citation, it is also less reliable and not independent? Why do we need this second citation? Anyway, like I said, not worth my time. Have fun. --Muhandes (talk) 12:21, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Muhandes, yes it's not good, I've come across lots of school articles in various lengths with no citations - many like this one. The alumni it had before had no citations at all including the one I re-added, where I was able to find one. Regarding the two citations, see here under the heading 'notable alumni sources', basically the school acknowledges the individual. Also here but the second reference supports the notability. Yeah you could just keep the secondary source only, but why not just keep them both anyway, don't think it's much of a problem (also see here)? But if you want to remove it, that's ok Steven (Editor) (talk) 21:13, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

If the main purpose of the second reference is to support notability, then per WP:ALUMNI, [w]hen alumni have their own articles in mainspace, it is not necessary for their notability to be referenced. I will remove the second reference. --Muhandes (talk) 10:58, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Muhandes, actually no references are needed at all, as per WP:ALUMNI: When alumni have their own articles in mainspace, it is not necessary for their notability to be referenced, as long as it is done in the biographical articles. I have already added references within his article confirming his attendance so I've removed the other reference. Steven (Editor) (talk) 16:42, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

With all due respect, I believe you are wrong, please read the whole section. It says Individual alumni need a citation to a) verify that they did indeed attend the school, and b) verify the statement of their notability. Only the next sentence is When alumni have their own articles in mainspace, it is not necessary for their notability to be referenced. You don't need a citation for purpose of notability since it is referenced in their article, you do need one for verifying that they did indeed attend the school, no matter how well this is referenced in their article.--Muhandes (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

By the way, pinging does not work when you add it after you already signed, see Help:Fixing failed pings. --Muhandes (talk) 18:53, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Yew Chung International School – Silicon Valley

Hello Steven (Editor). I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Yew Chung International School – Silicon Valley, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: R3 does not apply to redirects from page moves unless that page was also recently created. Thank you. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:33, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Amorymeltzer, the page move was recently created, I added speedy deletion straight after the move. Please let me know, thank you Steven (Editor) (talk) 17:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, you may have misunderstood me. To quote WP:CSD#R3, This criterion does not apply to redirects created as a result of a page move, unless the moved page was also recently created. That is, it's not the page move that needs to be recent, but the actual creation of the page. If you want it to be deleted, you can nominate it at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion, but R3 doesn't apply. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:39, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Amorymeltzer, yes I've confused myself haha, thanks for clarifying Steven (Editor) (talk) 20:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

American Politics alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Hi Galobtter, I made the edit after a few users in the chat room were requesting that American politician should be in the intro text like other presidential articles. After looking at the page history of Barack Obama at the time when he was president, it had "is an American politician serving as", so I replicated this. But thank you for reverting the edit, after seeing why you reverted, I didn't realise consensus was required for the intro text. I clicked on edit page again and I can see that there is a page notice which says "Please review current established consensus before editing this article, especially the lead section." Being preoccupied with other things, I completely missed this part, my mistake, but thanks again! :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:40, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Be careful with eg Malaysia vs Malaya

Hello. Before creating categories such as Category:1940s establishments in Malaysia you should check that there isn't already a category under the colonial name - in this case there is, Category:1940s establishments in British Malaya. I know Wikipedia isn't altogether consistent on these things but it's always worth a check for those countries that were colonies at the time. Le Deluge (talk) 22:47, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Le Deluge, I created the categories in a rush and didn't check on this, apologies, thank you for sorting this out for me :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:53, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Apologies on The Paideia School article.

Hey-

I did not mean to remove the spaces on The Paideia School. Apologies on that :) Thanks for keeping it clean! -Eamesheard (talk) 20:49, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Eamesheard, don't worry about it, it's not a big deal but just makes things easier when editing the infobox. The template page also follows the same layout :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 14:31, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

The Hill School

There should be no links to disambiguation pages, so now that you made The Hill School a dab page, would you please follow up and fix all the incoming links? (Dabsolver is helpful.) Thanks. — Gorthian (talk) 00:31, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Gorthian, yeah I've been fixing the links but you've moved it to The Hill School (disambiguation) now with The Hill School redirecting to The Hill School (Pennsylvania). I see you mentioned about primary topic, but once I've changed the links to The Hill School, all should be good, but what should we do now that you've moved it? Steven (Editor) (talk) 00:59, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

(ec) On second thought, it’s pretty clear that the title The Hill School is a WP: PRIMARYTOPIC, so the dab is now at The Hill School (disambiguation). You should not have moved the Pennsylvania school article (there are even categories for that school’s alumni and faculty!), and with only a couple other schools with the same name, everything could have been taken care of with hatnotes. But having a dab won’t hurt, either; it just won’t be at the base name. I’m going to ask at requested moves to have the Pennsylvania school moves back to the base title. — Gorthian (talk) 01:12, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Don’t fix any more links now... it’ll get moved back to its original title. Sorry about the edit conflict! I’m trying out the beta version and it’s sort of a mess. — Gorthian (talk) 01:17, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Gorthian, thanks for replying. Yeah I was also thinking that I should have left The Hill School as it was rather than make it a disambiguation, as the use of a hatnote would be better for this situation, as this school has significant notability, a lot of notable alumni and respective alumni and faculty categories. I was after having fixed the links, going to move the categories so that they end in "(Pennsylvania)". But at present, there's really only one other article, The Hill School in Virginia which is unsourced. The Hill School in New Orleans is now known as Waldorf School of New Orleans per its article. And like you said, primary topic. But yes, definitely keep the dab at The Hill School (disambiguation) (wish I created this rather than make The Hill School a dab per reasons mentioned). Can't we just use the move tool to move the Pennsylvania school back to the base title? Don't worry about it, it's all good Steven (Editor) (talk) 02:54, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

I wish we *could* move it back! But because there’s a page there already, that has to be deleted first, and only an admin can do that. This whole area of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC can be so confusing. If you run across another page like this, but that you *do* think should be moved, you can start a requested move discussion to gain consensus for the move. — Gorthian (talk) 03:51, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Gorthian, ah it's done it like that, very annoying - happened to me a few times, was able to move majority of pages back to its former name and for some, nope, page already exists. Had to list it at technical requests which you have already done and the page is now back at its original name, which is good! I've gone ahead and undone my changes to articles that were originally linked to The Hill School. I have left my changes for the ones that were originally linked to Hill School, as this redirects to the disambiguation page. Yeah I'm aware of this, but what's happened is, rather than look at the article properly at the time of creating the dab, a bit late and rushing, I went ahead and created the dab when it would fit better at The Hill School (disambiguation) rather than the base title per reasons above, or leave it as it was and make use of the hatnotes! If the other Hill article had the same significant notability then the dab would be at The Hill School, but at present, there's just that one. Thanks for going ahead and getting it moved back to its original name! Ah what a waste of time haha Steven (Editor) (talk) 20:12, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Ah, well, making mistakes is the only way we learn, after all. I’ve certainly done this myself enough times! You may want to read through (and take some time to digest) WP:DAB and MOS:DAB if you’ll be working with disambiguation pages more. And there’s even a WikiProject. :-) Happy editing! — Gorthian (talk) 20:21, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

That's true and thanks for that, I have read them before but will definitely go through again, well mainly the primary topic area. I'm not focussing on dabs at the moment, but working on maintenance for schools and sometimes I come across a school that may need to be disambiguated, so I usually check these out again when I'm creating the dab - certainly helps if I forget something or need to double check (didn't on this occasion and other reasons mentioned above). Anyway, thanks again and you too! :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 21:37, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Indus Trust) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Indus Trust, Steven (Editor)!

Wikipedia editor Power~enwiki just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

The article needs significant copy-editing improvements, but as a group that runs multiple high schools it is likely to be notable.

To reply, leave a comment on Power~enwiki's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

power~enwiki (π, ν) 22:35, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your tireless behind-the-scenes efforts. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

John from Idegon submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate Steven to be Editor of the Week for his tireless behind the scenes WIKIGNOME work. He does much of his gnoming in the realm of WikiProject Schools and is one of the most active editors in that WikiProject. He also is a frequent participant in discussions on the project talk page, where his comments are always insightful, highly clueful for an editor of his experience level, and helpful. Although he has been a registered editor since late 2016, he only became highly active this year, with over 3,000 edits, and indiciative of his gnomework par excellance, these edits are to over 1,900 different articles. For these reasons, and also for his great patience with slow moving Wikipedians, I am overjoyed to nominate Steven for the EDDY.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}

Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 20:32, 9 September 2018 (UTC)