User talk:Colonies Chris/Archive/2017/Nov

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Colonies Chris. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on National Cycle Route 88 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Searingjet (talk) 17:20, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Dear Sir,

May I say that your recent redirecting of titles of certain Warner Bros. cartoons of the 1930s to the page on the studio's filmography of the period is well received. As long as each cartoon is without an article of its own, this change will undoubtedly eliminate some confusion. Now, if the cartoons without articles of their own should receive them in course of time, it would, of course, be only gradually, and would more unfortunately involve, in many cases, the deleting of your text, which, as I say, is a pleasant invention. And so, I write to ask whether you would find it terribly objectionable if I were to write summaries for those same cartoons, preserving, in each case, the redirection to the filmography until an article has been written. Please let me know your thoughts at your leisure. Sincerely, Twozenhauer (talk) 04:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Twozenhauer - thanks for your appreciation of my work. I'd be delighted if details could be filled in. Bear in mind, however, that a very short article may face attempts at deletion (not from me!), on the grounds that the film is insufficently notable to merit its own article. So whatever you write will need to contain more information than is contained in the umbrella article and be appropriately referenced. Best wishes. Colonies Chris (talk) 20:45, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Sir, Thank you for your speedy reply, for your consideration of my question, and for the happy resolution upon the matter. Indeed, in answer to your worthy concern, I have been working on a summary of one cartoon in particular for a little while now, and I fear that, if anything, it may be deemed a touch too long! But that does not happen often, and it is about the length, I think, of the other summaries I have written on similar subjects. (I hope to publish it in a day or two.) Thanks for your good wishes; please know that they are returned. Yours truly, Twozenhauer (talk) 02:50, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, when you change ===Section titles===, make sure you do a search and replace for possible intra-article links, which look like [[#Section titles|see below]].77.54.121.15 (talk) 09:36, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Please be specific. What article are you talking about? Colonies Chris (talk) 12:27, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

CC, thanks again for your continuing great work on fixing British railway line templates and names and such. Let me know if there's something I can do to help. I realize there are likely to always be some line/Line inconsistencies, since a few really do seem to be treated as proper names consistently. And getting every link to a name to agree and bypass redirects is a neverending thankless task; at least when doing that in templates there's a bit of leverage, and they're perhaps easier to find. If you think there are more such things where my help would be useful, let me know. I'm downcasing lots of Asian station and railway titles now, so probably a bunch will come up in that context. Hopefully some Asian editors who know this area better will get involved, but so far not much. Dicklyon (talk) 21:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Boeing 767-233. Since you had some involvement with the Boeing 767-233 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Burninthruthesky (talk) 10:05, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits of the Army-Navy game page in which you spelled out the states (which I take to be consistent with Wikipedia policy)rather than use the USPS abbreviations. The one I have an issue with, however, is the spelling out of California in the Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA CSA, both because that is the actual name of the CSA, and because spelling out the California makes it inconsistent with the other CSAs. Before I change it back, though, I thought I’d bounce it off of you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 3665047379b (talk • contribs) 14:28, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree - that was a mistake on my part; I've corrected that and several related issues. Colonies Chris (talk) 14:37, 15 November 2017 (UTC)