User talk:Bob@romiley1

From Roader's Digest: The SABRE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archived items

Templates, Ratings and Needs Image


Could you be careful when changing templates, like the Ratings tag? You're sometimes losing a { or a }, which breaks it. Could you check that it's OK before hitting "save" and moving on please?

You've also started moving the "Needs Image" tag to the top. Could you please not do that - there's a reason that we put that sort of thing at the bottom! Down there it still gets flagged up in all the relevant "please fix this" categories, but it doesn't totally break up the flow of the page itself. 'Tis why all the Navboxes and so on are all at the bottom.

Ta! Steven 09:01, 8 October 2012 (BST)


I changed the rating of the B4300 page from 2* to 1* on the ground that there's no text and surely can't be classed as more than a stub. I notice you've changed it back, so what's your opinion on the ratings? Vlad 21:04, 27 November 2012 (GMT)

A lot of pages seem to have had their ratings upped from 1* to 2* lately. I haven't had time to really look into it, but basically if there is no text, then 1* is the maximum the page should have. Giving a page with no text 2* is utter nonsense. Rileyrob 21:41, 27 November 2012 (GMT)
I believe that where a SabreMap is added it affects the rating despite the absence of a description. Bob
The guidelines for ratings are here, where the two star rating guide says:
The article has at least some basic information on the subject, for example a route description. This basic information should be a paragraph or two. Articles with only a single sentence should be classified as a stub (and thus rated as 1 star).
I think this is pretty clear as it stands, but the question is, should the ratings guide be changed, or are we happy with it? Steven 08:36, 28 November 2012 (GMT)
Obviously I feel the ratings guide should be changed. If a map has been included at least Rate 2 should be given.Bob 1025,28 November 2012 {GMT}
OK, let's get people involved in this - I'll start a thread on the forum. In the meantime, could you stick to the current guidelines please Bob? Steven

Bob, please stop changing things to things that are wrong according to the current guidelines until people have had chance to comment and we've got it changed, if that's what people think is right. Steven 11:52, 28 November 2012 (GMT)

The thread's now up, Bob, so come and have your say! Steven 13:33, 28 November 2012 (GMT)

You've done it again. Seriously, why do you think that a page with no text (specifically this one) is worth 2*? Vlad 21:48, 28 January 2013 (GMT)

Vlad- Guilty as charged. I had assumed that you were about to fill in a description- It would have been the last one in a group you had done the others. User:bob@romiley1/Bob0950, 29 January 2013(GMT).

"SABRE Map now shown"

I thought these edit summaries were you adding map tags, whereas in fact you're making dummy edits to make maps appear.

These were caused by a bug in the map control, which causes the page to screw up if a bot tries to do a dummy edit on it. I've fixed the bug and restarted the cache, so you shouldn't ever have to do this again. Ritchie333 16:34, 2 April 2013 (BST)

Maps will now be shown I assume where the appropriate request has been input.Bob 17:49, 2 April 2013 (BST)

Highways Authorities

...are not former Metropolitan Counties. They're the people who maintain the road network, and seeing as Met Counties no longer exist, they don't do any maintenance. They're also not Traditional Counties. Steven 17:43, 27 April 2013 (BST)

Junction Pages

Bob, you've just created two duplicate pages of Gilmerton Road Roundabout under different titles. Not sure if this was intentional or not, but I've deleted both to avoid any confusion. Rileyrob 17:21, 2 May 2013 (BST)


What is your source for the various roundabout pages you are creating? )Ritchie333 09:18, 7 May 2013 (BST

.. Names on signposts approaching roundabout. eg.ABC Roundabout.Bob 09:26, 7 May 2013 (BST

Roundabouts, junctions and errors

Hi Bob. Sorry, you're making too many mistakes on these roundabout / junction pages - I mean, it was good in a way because I managed to spot some error handling bugs, but bad because your rename of Newbridge Roundabout to Newbridge Junction didn't clear up everything, so some galleries and the infobox broke and would cause browser crashes in certain places.

Rather than being draconian and saying "stop it", do you think you could have a look at some of the Ireland road pages instead? They really do need somebody looking over all of them - I've done a large amount of National Primary and National Secondary roads, but by no means everything.

Each N and R road needs a brief description, a page, a picture and a working infobox.

Do you think you could tackle that? Ritchie333 (talk) 14:19, 24 May 2013 (BST)

I can and will tackle that without roundabouts when I have finished Scotland. Bob 1436,24 May 2013 (BST)

  • Can I politely ask exactly what the point of Category:Roundabouts is? If you're planning to include every single roundabout in the UK and Ireland then that's going to be a pretty large category. What do you envisage doing with it? Ritchie333 (talk) 12:10, 29 May 2013 (BST)

My previous message said WITHOUT Roundabouts Bob 1217, 29 May 2013 (BST)

  • Indeed they have. I would have thought that the gentleman who raised the new cat wanted some entries in it. However from your comments perhaps not Bob 1259, 29 May 2013 (BST)
  • Huh? Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Ritchie333 (talk) 13:20, 29 May 2013 (BST)
Well this was a category started by someone else. I assumed that he would expect as many entries in the Cat as possible. Bob 1558, 29 May 2013 (BST)

I recently created the Category:Roundabouts in question in order to eradicate a couple of red links I had spotted. It proved emptier than I expected, although fuller than Category:Roundabout (which I meant to empty, but may not have done). We had a discussion somewhere a year or two ago about breaking down the Category:Junctions into more usable chunks for searching etc, which as far as I can remember remained inconclusive. The sheer number of Roundabouts means that Cat:Rbt will be of no more use than Cat:Jnc, but could be an intermediate cat leading to Magic, Mini, GSJ, and any others we can make up.

I certainly had no expectation that I was inviting people to populate the category, and had meant to do a bit more work but got distracted with something else. Rileyrob (talk) 17:25, 29 May 2013 (BST)

SQL Injection attempt

Why on earth did you create this page? It looks like a SQL injection attempt to crack the Wiki. I can't believe for a second you'd want to do this. Ritchie333 (talk) 12:56, 5 June 2013 (BST)

Irish counties

Bob- the routebox refers to "Traditonal counties", i.e. the place rather than the Highway authority. This seems to me to be Dublin rather than Fingal. There was always a Dublin city and Dublin county, but the oounty was Dublin for both of these. Bothar (talk) 17:44, 29 June 2013 (BST) Bother. Good point there. I agree it should be Dublin as the Traditional County I will leave it to you to re amend to your original. Bob 1752,29 June 2013. (BST)

Whilst we're on the subject, Bob, you're forgetting to use the "pipe trick" on the Highway Authority field - you're leaving the really messy looking XXX (Highway Authority) in the routebox rather than just showing XXX. Steven (talk) 14:45, 30 June 2013 (BST)

No!! Don't take out the links - you know how to do it, you're using the same trick on the County fields, and you've done it a thousand times on GB roads!! Fingal is an example rather than the plain Fingal (Highway Authority). Steven (talk) 15:04, 30 June 2013 (BST)

SABRE - The Society for All British and Irish Road Enthusiasts
Discuss - Digest - Discover - Help