User talk:Ritchie333

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

Northern Ireland A3

Hi Ritchie. I suspect the photo from Geograph added to the NI A3 page should be titled "former A3", from Streetview it actually appears to be the parallel Vicarage Road. The coords in Geograph on Streetview show the modern A3, well surfaced with hard shoulders.Bothar 22:25, 20 April 2012 (BST)

Oops. I thought the road surface was a bit suspect! Can you find a better photo and replace it? --Ritchie333 09:08, 21 April 2012 (BST)
Done. I found another picture by the same photographer on Geograph, but actually the A3 this time. I also amended the reference to the other picture in the gallery. Bothar 22:27, 21 April 2012 (BST)


Why did you revert my B4483 changes? "Sedgeley" is a misspelling for "Sedgley", and the boundary is the Met Borough boundary, not the edge of the town. And I'm sure Birmingham is an OK link... Steven 09:14, 27 April 2012 (BST)

I wasn't aware I did! I must have hit the wrong button on my iPhone, so if it'll help, I can chop my fingers off :-D --Ritchie333 09:16, 27 April 2012 (BST)

Uncompleted Wikis

Please mark your Wikis which you have decided to to Save but which are not complete. It then gives guidance to others (such as me) when processing a further adjustment. Bob 15:10, 27 April 2012 (BST)

Eh? This doesn't make sense.--Ritchie333 15:13, 27 April 2012 (BST)
To explain: A Wiki (not by you) was Saved by another user. I amended it on the basis of Red print. Yet another user said it was not complete.

Bob 15:19, 27 April 2012 (BST)

Well I'm going to guess you mean "Put an 'under construction' note on a page if you're in the middle of research so you don't get clobbered by edit conflicts". The easiest way to do this is that if you see a page in the "Recent changes" list, go to "Who's online" and see if somebody is actively editing the page. --Ritchie333 15:24, 27 April 2012 (BST)
Yes your guess is correct. Your idea works but why not just add W.I.P to the original submission.

Bob 15:29, 27 April 2012 (BST)

I guess in the instance you're talking about, I assumed writing "can somebody else figure out why the mapbox doesn't work?" was a clue that I wasn't done with the article. --Ritchie333 15:34, 27 April 2012 (BST)

That wouldn't help the problem with Simon's page earlier. He put a link to a page he was about to create on another page so that it was ready to go, and that link was removed a few minutes before Simon hit "save" on the new page. The only way to solve it is to slow down and give people more time to do stuff, or to take a close look at the page and spot that "Tallaght" was in the template at the bottom, therefore take a stab that someone knew it was going to be created already. Steven 15:36, 27 April 2012 (BST)

New SABRE Maps extension

Ritchie, have you made a change to the SABRE Maps extension feature? All the routeboxes with SABRE Maps extracts are now too wide! They should be 250px for the routebox to fit properly. Steven 19:37, 5 May 2012 (BST)

Yes, it uses a different API to get tiles, so it can retrieve them from multiple map sources, giving us access to NPE, Popular, the NLS archives, etc etc. However, I haven't changed any of the code that relates to the box width. --Ritchie333 10:05, 6 May 2012 (BST)
Update - the routebox doesn't specify a width and height for the sabre maps extension, which default to 320 and 200. I've changed the default to 250. --Ritchie333 10:10, 6 May 2012 (BST)

Ellsemere Port

Err, it's Ellesmere Port and we have a page already. Could you merge the two pages onto the correct spelling? Si404 14:53, 23 May 2012 (BST)

Oops. I saw a redlink on Chester, thought "wonder why we don't have a page on this?" and made one. I think my newer one's better, but feel free to disagree! --Ritchie333 14:56, 23 May 2012 (BST)


You really haven't heard of it? [1] Doesn't go to Romney Marsh though! Si404 16:25, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I did mean "never heard of signs going to Romney Marsh", but since the extension to Victoria Road opened about a year ago, nobody's really sure if it actually still exists on its current route via Brookvale Road and Beaver Lane, since through traffic doesn't tend to go that way anymore. --Ritchie333 17:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

1922 Road Lists

Ritchie, I take your point, re the 1922 Road Lists/Zone 2 Class II article, that "This list is a transcription of the original hard copy" (even if, to be picky -- you know ME! -- the 1922 Road Lists page says that "The information is derived from", not " a transcription of" the HMSO's booklet of 1923). [My italics.]

I won't, therefore, alter anything in the lefthand column of such lists in future. I assume, though, that additions/amendments to the righthand (Notes) column will not be out of order. -- Viator 23:04, 5 August 2012 (BST)

  • Hi. The reason I did this is because there's that other wiki (I won't mention names) and the 1922 Road Lists is used in places as what they term a reliable source. So if people start editing, some people will jump up and down screaming "unreliable source! unreliable source! Burn them! Burn them!" or something like that. It does remain editable to all because there may be mistakes that need to be corrected. Sorry if I came across a bit forceful! --Ritchie333 12:16, 6 August 2012 (BST)


I believe there was a template setup somewhere where we couldn't physically use a comma, so had to use a template for it instead. However it looks like it's no longer relevant. Just sayin' ;-) Jeni (talk) 15:39, 29 April 2013 (BST)

I think we can probably delete it then. While you're here, can you please document how Template:Coord works? Ritchie333 11:31, 30 April 2013 (BST)
Done :-) Jeni (talk) 16:37, 30 April 2013 (BST)

Picture Gallery

If memory serves, the fugly bit at the bottom gets the related gallery pages as links. As each gallery can only be a subgallery of one parent, it's a way of getting multiple subgalleries - so when you have a gallery of a place, you then have those links for junctions etc. Steven 12:00, 2 May 2013 (BST)

  • Yup. I'll uncomment it when it displays properly, which it never has done. Working through a paging version of the gallery at the mo (which is what Template:Picture gallery test is for). Ritchie333 12:01, 2 May 2013 (BST)

Level crossings lists etc

The lists of:

  • Level crossings
  • Passenger ferries
  • Abandoned roads
  • Road stars
  • Owen Williams Bridges

are all hideous as soon as you look at the template level. There's templates inside templates inside templates - all interdependant on one another. Have a look and see what you think, but right now it's probably easier to rip the whole lot out, have a single "header" template and a "row" template across the whole lot and deal with the pain of going through the articles getting it right. Steven 15:41, 3 May 2013 (BST)

  • Well, let me put it like this. If it's not been touched in three and a half years, and it's not documented, bin it. So yes, rip it out and start again sounds like a good idea. If somebody complains, explain the value of documenting things. ;-) Ritchie333 15:53, 3 May 2013 (BST)
Some of that is my fault, as I've just bodged new templates to do what I want. I think there are a few more bodged lists around, because there were different things 'needed' in the table, and I didn't want to break an existing template.
However if a single multi-use template can be set up, i'll have a go at fixing my rubbish! Useful Header titles are Name, Photo, Road number, Location, lat/lng/zoom to generate a map, GR maybe, notes and maybe a couple more.
Other lists might include Hill Passes and Wades Bridges. I dare say that the named junctions list might be mergable too, although a lot more work. I cant remember how the map lists work, but they are obviously needing different headers! Rileyrob

Well, if we can come up with some standard headings, that would be sensible. I'll have a think and come up with a list. Steven 17:50, 8 May 2013 (BST)

NI A road gallery splitting in two

Given that there are only 71 A roads (inclusive of the A8(M)), do they need splitting (cf the blocks of 100 in Britain)? And A50 seems an arbitary place to split (40:31) - 39/40 is the historic split (OK, A11 and A12 swap with the A500-A501), giving a 32:39 split and 99/100 is the numerical split (51:20), consistent with the templates and other galleries. Si404 17:40, 8 May 2013 (BST)

Yes, because the gallery takes too long to load otherwise. Feel free to reshuffle it to A1-A39 and A40-A999. Does that give you the original / later split as suggested above? Ritchie333 17:43, 8 May 2013 (BST)
OK, but why do Gallery:A1-A99, etc have over 100 sub-galleries and yet are considered fine? (The original A roads were A1-A8, A20-A39, A500-A501). I still see little reason for the split, unless you plan on splitting the 'Roads by 100s' ones up as well. The A51-A9999 gallery would look better with the name 'other A roads (Northern Ireland)' or similar. Si404 18:47, 8 May 2013 (BST)
Before we get to that stage, we need to correct the sorting. Why does A1-99 go A14 (Royston - Alconbury), A38, A17, A31, A41, A92 and not A1, A2, A3, A4, A5? Ritchie333 18:52, 8 May 2013 (BST)
Indeed!Si404 18:55, 8 May 2013 (BST)
So fix it! You need to add a sort parameter to each individual {{Picture gallery}} template. Ritchie333 18:57, 8 May 2013 (BST)

New templates

Hi Ritchie,

When you've sorted out your new future templates (including the documentation!!!!), can you make sure that the templates themselves go in a category called something like "Future Templates", a subcat of "Templates" so we don't lose them?

Ta! Steven (talk) 11:36, 6 June 2013 (BST)

As a thought, have you seen Preston Bypass? It might be worth either reusing the existing "Road Scheme" template and re-jigging it to give the full information, or messing about with FutureProject so that it looks similar? At the moment, you're potentially reinventing the wheel a little bit, and we run the risk of having two separate things doing the same job. Also, it might be worth thinking about the complexities of adding a whole new namespace, and the potential issues regarding things like searches outside the Main namespace. Steven (talk) 12:09, 6 June 2013 (BST)
Never heard of Template:Road Scheme before. There's a subtle but important reason for using a separate namespace - it allows me to add a proper GUI on the front end, so creating and editing a Futures project is as easy as it was on CBRD - or people won't use it! I've deliberately designed the Futures templates to make this easy to do, and having got working code with editing galleries and categories, doing the same here should now be an evening's work. Ritchie333 (talk) 12:15, 6 June 2013 (BST)
OK, so do we keep two similar templates that do almost the same thing? Another slight concern is the use of the word "Future". What happens once things stop being "future" - either through binning or completion? Should the namespace be called "Projects" rather then "Future"? And do we need to do something with the Navboxes so that related futures/projects appear on the main road page? IIRC, the Navbox will already grab anything in Category:Road Projects - but I'd need to do some testing as to whether it works with non-Main namespace items. Steven (talk) 12:23, 6 June 2013 (BST)

Yes, the Navbox does pick things up if they're in the right categories, which Template:Road Scheme does automatically, though it puts the "Future" namespace in there too, which will really look rubbish when something's been finished 5 years. Steven (talk) 12:29, 6 June 2013 (BST)
Well, it's no worse than what currently happens on CBRD is it? That's got ten years of "Futures" on it. Before we do anything else, I want some more feedback from the general readership. A lot of people contributed to CBRD and are familiar with how it works and how its used - a quick glance of some stats reveals there were at least twice as many current schemes on CBRD as schemes linked through Template:Road Scheme, so it's fairly obvious which one would be easier to throw away from my view. I think as long as we just stick with the three test schemes I've created, it's not too hard to juggle things around. Ritchie333 (talk) 12:31, 6 June 2013 (BST)

To be fair, CBRD has always had more contributors than the Wiki, so that's hardly surprising! But I'm certainly not talking about throwing away your work from this morning, but we will see what other people think. Steven (talk) 12:36, 6 June 2013 (BST)

Okay. In the meantime, I would caution people that the three pages are test pages, so if you hand edit them to add extra stuff outside of the template declarations, you may get a nasty surprise when the UI doesn't recognise it and inadvertently deletes it because it doesn't know what to do with it. Ritchie333 (talk) 12:46, 6 June 2013 (BST)
Looking good so far. My own view is that the first batch of information would be better in a routebox style block on the top right, to make it more in keeping with the rest of the Wiki. This could then also incorporate a Sabremap extract, but may well be best if it is wider than the standard routebox to prevent too much wordwrap Also making it stylistically different with a different layout would differentiate the pages a bit so people recognised that the futures pages were not regular (boring) wiki pages. This would also give less whitespace and more info without the need to scroll too much.
I appreciate there is probably a conscious effort to replicate CBRD here, but Chris had menus on both sides and a background watermark so the whitespace appears smaller. Actually, thinking whilst typing, could the whitespace just be converted to a map block (with marker pins?)?
The new editor has just appeared (I remembered &raw so I could see what I wanted to see!!) and also looks nice and user friendly. More rambling thoughts may follow... Rileyrob (talk) 15:27, 6 June 2013 (BST)
Well you can now create schemes, update them and add progress reports, pretty much mimicing exactly what CBRD did. Not bad for an afternoon's work ;-) ... next thing is to scrape all the rest of the entries onto here, see what people think, then make improvements. Oh, and if we can attract Chris' attention, see if he can poke CBRD to link each entry to the page on here. Ritchie333 (talk) 15:39, 6 June 2013 (BST)

Right, I've created sandbox to play in, and created in there a routebox-like structure that makes it look like other pages on the Wiki, adds pages to the right categories (so the Navboxes all work elsewhere), links to SABRE Maps and all sorts of stuff that might be useful. Where possible it already uses parameters that you've defined, so if people like it I'd need to bugfix it properly, then you'd need to write the front end code to add all the new parameters. One thing I know doesn't work - when the Highway Authority is wikilinked, it breaks. Steven (talk) 15:53, 7 June 2013 (BST)
Yes, you need to be ultra careful with those two templates, because if you add new stuff and nobody writes the corresponding front end code, they will automatically be removed. The "save" code is clever enough to do a partial replace in templates, but not for individual fields within it. In what way does the Highway Authority break? Ritchie333 (talk) 16:03, 7 June 2013 (BST)
It breaks because the "routebox" automatically links the Authority already, appending (Highway Authority) to the name in the "Authority" parameter to make sure it points to the right place. It's a simple fix - "DO NOT WIKILINK" in the front end form!! Steven (talk) 16:33, 7 June 2013 (BST)

Right, one batch of bugfixing later, and we have Future:M54 link to M6 Toll sandbox. It's all working, the code is documented and commented, and everything works apart from "status", which I think is a bug in your code and I'll take a look at it tomorrow if you don't get there first. All the links work, categorisation works, the SABRE Map linkage works, and it appears successfully in all the relevant linked pages's Navboxes. There's a couple of things I wanted to add earlier, but I can't remember what they are now! Steven (talk) 22:09, 7 June 2013 (BST)

OK, everything works about from the SABRE Maps links with the Gridref parameter, which just utterly doesn't work, and I've no idea why. Steven (talk) 22:18, 7 June 2013 (BST)
Umm ... there seem to be an awful lot of new fields for that template. How were you planning to design the user interface for editing them, and who would be writing the PHP code for it? :-/ Ritchie333 (talk) 10:22, 10 June 2013 (BST)
Well, if you can think of a better way to get it looking like it belongs on the Wiki rather than not matching anything else..., be my guest.... ;-) Seriously for a minute, it's actually not dissimilar to adding a picture, especially the original upload form. Steven (talk) 10:42, 10 June 2013 (BST)

Template:FutureProject sandbox

Hi Ritchie,

Right, I think the sandbox version of FutureProject with all the relevant new stuff to display the Routebox on the right hand side is now good to go, and makes the Futures look a lot more like it belongs on the SABRE Wiki. If you (and anyone else that wants a go) can have a play with Future:M54 link to M6 Toll sandbox to make sure you can't break it (beyond the whole extra wikilinks thing), and then when you're happy add the new parameters to your front-end code, that would be great. BTW - is the front end code documented anywhere? At the moment, I'm effectively locked out of making any changes to this that might be necessary later. Of course, some might say that's a good thing.... ;-) Steven (talk) 10:25, 10 June 2013 (BST)

  • The front end UI extension is documented in the "wiki" area of technical documentation. It's fairly easy to add new text boxes and drop down menus (at least if you understand PHP, JavaScript and the MediaWiki technical API), but I noticed a few things like location and map, which I think deserve a better user interface than typing it in. Remember that with a large selection of options, people may be put off editing altogether. Ritchie333 (talk) 10:43, 10 June 2013 (BST)
Well, "Location" is just a text field, so dead easy. The only complicated one is the sabremap link, which is a pain in the rear however you look at it - but it's exactly the same as that used everywhere else, and people have got used to it - it's not exactly a "one-time only" deal. The multiple select things like "road" would work quite happily in a single row of text boxes, in the same way as they work in the picture upload form. Rather amazingly perhaps, there are actually less options than adding a new road, for example, and people cope with the plain Wiki templates there... Of course, if you want, there could always be a separate form for "fill in the Routebox details", if you think that would be more appropriate. Steven (talk) 11:01, 10 June 2013 (BST)

Adminsitrative regions

Hi Ritchie

I wondered if there might be a way of including administrative boundaries on OSM in Sabre map e.g. maybe something like the road trace Bothar (talk) 22:10, 11 June 2013 (BST)

Yes, it's technically doable, it's just another OSM file that can be overlaid. Can you tell me an easy way of how I can find all the relevant relations I'll need? Ritchie333 (talk) 10:42, 12 June 2013 (BST)
Good stuff! Great to have an expert on board. For Ireland, at least, this page has relations for counties etc Bothar (talk) 11:09, 12 June 2013 (BST)
It would be extra-nice if OSM handled historic county boundaries as well as admin boundaries! Boundaries are, as usual in GB, an utter mess, and we're likely to end up with a partial set - the Met Boroughs and London Boroughs, despite being top-tier authorities, are mapped as districts, IIRC. Steven (talk) 11:54, 12 June 2013 (BST)
Well, I've done some experiments this evening, but basically I now have a database based on OSM data, with extra queryable metadata such as road numbers. I've managed to generate traces which work with map boxes, so I'll have more control over updates. But why stop there? If I can get SABRE maps to generate this data itself, it's a matter of us sitting down with 7th Series or NPE coverage, click click click click ... voila - traces of traditional counties! In your face, Wikipedia! Ritchie333 (talk) 00:57, 13 June 2013 (BST)
Ooooo, now I'm excited! If we can map all this sort of stuff, then in theory, we could possibly extend it further - historic route traces perhaps? Steven (talk) 02:34, 13 June 2013 (BST)

Mapbox template

Hi Ritchie,

Is there any chance you could update the documentation for the mapbox template - I don't think it's right. Ta! Steven (talk) 13:27, 2 April 2014 (BST)

Have a look now - it's got a worked example directly cribbed from the A82 page, which uses the majority of features. Oh, and regarding the tracing, as you can see there's an undocumented feature on SABRE Maps that allows you to scribble on a map, but it doesn't do anything useful like save it .... yet. Ritchie333 (talk) 14:04, 2 April 2014 (BST)

Defunct traces

Excellent stuff there! Is it actual OSM edits, or just a trace file made at home?Si404 (talk) 15:35, 14 October 2014 (BST) PS While we're on traces, I think Ireland's traces need a refresh, plus there's things like E roads and cycle routes that we don't have traces for. Thanks.

Check your PM inbox Si, it'll show you how to do you own. These are all home made generated traces on SABRE Maps itself. I'll see if I can run the OSM script again, as I haven't done so in a while. Ritchie333 (talk) 15:37, 14 October 2014 (BST)

how do you make a signature??

how do you make a signature??M4crossing (talk) 12:01, 18 October 2014 (BST)

Roman Roads

Hi Richie (and others by default).

Many thanks for your edits, improvements, etc. to the Watling Street page. I really like the route maps, they add real class to the descriptions. You may recognise me as 'Lez Watson'. I am he, but I got in a mess with my account and so registered afresh as GeorgeEvans (my granddad).

I'd done some work a few years ago on the modern roads in my areas (Burton-on-Trent and Aylesbury (birthplace) +/- 50 miles), i.e. A38, A444, A413, A515 (a favourite), the B roads a bit and so on. I thought it would be fun to do a bit on Roman roads, having seen some action there on the site, so recently I did a taster on the Ryknild Street page. My contributions to Watling street street flow from that. I felt I could kick it off as I know the sections from Towcester to Wroxeter pretty well.

Q: do you think Sabre could consolodate the Roman pages into a sub-project of some kind for us archaeologically inclined? We could adopt Ivan Margary's numbering system as the basis of our stuff and see how it went. I think roads prefixed 'R' or 'RR' would be nice. Thus Watling Street would be the R1....

Wadya think?

Lez (aka George)

Of 1/11/14: posted on forum.
Oh, sorry - I did mean to reply to this but I forgot and there's been other stuff on SABRE that has occupied my time, but I really do like this idea. I'll go and read the thread. Ritchie333 (talk) 11:54, 1 November 2014 (GMT)

Bóithre réigiúnacha

Hi, Ritchie. As I see you've made a start on the Regional Roads (Republic of Ireland) page -- for which many thanks; I needed the kick-start! :) -- I've confined the plans I mentioned on my Talk page to "copyediting in" some of the additional information from my notes. I hope to return to the task and incorporate the rest shortly. -- Viator (talk) 12:20, 21 April 2016 (BST)

Thanks Kevin, my Irish is terrible so I had to make a wild guess at what the translation would be, but being reasonably proficient in French, I should have twigged that chemin was masculine. Ritchie333 (talk) 12:22, 21 April 2016 (BST)


I enjoyed the N71 page which seems to have mostly been written by you. One thing that puzzled me though is where you claim in a 2014 edit that "contemporary signage" directs N71 traffic from Skibbereen to Drimoleague to Scart. I've checked on Google Streetview and I find no evidence of this. The signage matches the road mapping. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacetweek (talkcontribs) 09:51, 16 October 2019‎

I drove the extent of the N71 in 2014, but I can't remember where I got the idea for this. If you're sure it's wrong, revert it. Ritchie333 (talk) 13:29, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

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