User talk:Owain/archive8

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3
• Archive 4
• Archive 5
• Archive 6
• Archive 7

---

Newport Stadium

Hi Owain, you made a couple of edits yesterday reflecting an increased capacity at Newport Stadium. Newport City Council (the reference cited, here) note a capacity there of 4300. Would you add a WP:RS reference to any article change to the stadium's capacity please. Cheers, Daicaregos (talk) 11:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

My source is an email received from Newport County's e-news service stating an increase of 400 behind the goal at the cricket end. Owain (talk) 12:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I may be wrong, but I'm guessing the email would amount to WP:OR, but the newspapers are bound to pick it up soon. Once you can cite them, the change can be made. Good news, anyway. Let's hope their results help them to fill the bigger ground. Best, Daicaregos (talk) 13:41, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Glad you found a source Owain. Looking good at 19th in Wales. Cheers, Daicaregos (talk) 21:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Glamorgan

I'm working with FruitMonkey on a major effort to improve the Glamorgan article. There are lots of sources and I think that we can probably get this to GA relatively rapidly. I thought that you might like to help out, given your interest in the historic counties. Cheers.--Pondle (talk) 11:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing. Do we have a list of what needs doing to make it GA? Owain (talk) 11:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

It has to meet the general criteria here - we need lots more on social and economic history, transport, landmarks, relevant images etc. Once we've expanded it significantly we can submit it for review and take things from there.--Pondle (talk) 12:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

File:St Julians railway bridge.jpg

Hi there. I note that we don't have any evidence to support the licence status and the image is currently listed on Flickr as copyrighted. Although it is the case the Flickr users can change licences to be more restrictive, it is my understanding that the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 is not an option they can choose. I'm therefore inclined to suggest that this image should probably be deleted but I'd welcome any comments you may have regarding this issue. I've found an alternative image to illustrate St. Julian's railway bridge from the Geograph project. Would you object to me deleting this image? Adambro (talk) 18:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I note your comment that "The author has agreed to license his Newport pictures under the GFDL. (permissions@wikimedia.org mail sent November 10, 2006)." on another image. I'll look into that and tag the images as necessary. Regards. Adambro (talk) 18:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately it doesn't seem that we have confirmation that the photographer has agreed to licence his Newport images under the GFDL. I've looked at the ticket which was sent to permissions@wikimedia.org on November 10, 2006 (VRTS ticket # 2006111010009084 for anyone else with access) and the photographer only gave permission to use the image of the Newport bridge (File:Newport Bridge.jpg). He didn't agree in that email to release it under the terms of the GFDL, nor mention any of his other Newport images (e.g [1]). One of the other OTRS volunteers did email the photographer back to try to clarify things but no response was received. Perhaps you could get in touch with the photographer again, with reference to the guidance at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission, to try to resolve this issue? Adambro (talk) 18:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Recent action

Owain, your edits are becoming more and more obstructive. Firstly, please do not continue to add United Kingdom to the Newport page. It is generally accepted that just Wales (or Scotland, England, NI) suffices. Secondly, how dare you revert a merge that has been practically universally agreed upon by consensus. If you have a problem, you raise it on the talk page. Thirdly, please do not let your traditionalist views affect your edits, as they have been raised on a few occasions at the Welsh Wikipedians discussion board. Welshleprechaun (talk) 17:23, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Don't tell me not to add correct information to articles. You do not have the right to suppress information. Secondly, if you are referring to the Cardiganshire "merge" then three editors deciding in the space of three days to mess up the "generally accepted" view that two articles is the correct way to go despite the years of debate above it on the talk page is clearly a more destructive edit than any of the restoration work I have done. Owain (talk) 08:42, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Whether the information is correct or not is not the issue, we're talking about the content issue, specifically you contradicting WP guidelines which exist for a reason. Also you had chance to particpate in the discussion about the merge, and even if you had, the consensus was to merge, and since the merge no other editor has disagreed. If you have a problem with it, take it higher rather than reverting as this act is disruptive. Welshleprechaun (talk) 07:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Newport Corporation listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Newport Corporation. Since you had some involvement with the Newport Corporation redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Oakwood (talk) 02:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Owain, I suggested the deletion of the redirect you created. The reason is that imho it doesn't make sense to redirect "Newport Corporation" to Newport City Councyl". Cheers.Oakwood (talk) 02:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Why doesn't it make sense? Owain (talk) 18:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Newport County

Just to say thanks for your edits on the Conference South table and results over the season - I do a lot of the non-league tables on Wikipedia and it's nice to have someone join in. I picked up along the way that you're a Newport fan, so I'd like to say well done to them for making another step towards where they were before they went bust all those years ago. I remember their downfall so it's great to see them coming back. Hope for another promotion next year! Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:25, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words sir. I will endeavour to update the Conference National table and results grid next season! ;) Owain (talk) 22:30, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Hahah! I look forward to it! Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I don't really understand the rationale for why you undid my edit to the Newport article. I've started a discussion on the talk page, so please let me know what you think there. Ta! Dancarney (talk) 10:14, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, I will. It just seems that you are removing valid information rather than trying to re-factor it into a more acceptable (to you) format. Owain (talk) 10:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Newport County A.F.C.. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Jeni ^(talk) 13:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

You think you're pretty funny don't you? All the citation needed tags were removed, hence the removal of the refimprove tag. If you want to label specific sections as in need of attention then please do so. Blanket refimprove tags do not help. Owain (talk) 13:59, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Newport County A.F.C., without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Jeni ^(talk) 14:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Newport County A.F.C.. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Jeni ^(talk) 14:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)