User talk:Jimmy Lancashire

April 2007[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. One or more of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Glasgow, have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Barryob Vigeur de dessus 10:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dialect pages[edit]

I see that you have been looking at the Lancashire Dialect and Accent page. I actually wrote 95% of that myself just because every other dialect had a page and no-one would make one for Lancashire. However, I am from West Yorkshire (Ossett), so am not ideally disposed to run the page. You are obviously from Lancashire. What did you make of it? The books mentioned at the bottom were my academic sources. I have also looked up odd things in the English Dialect Dictionary.

I also noted that you edited some stuff on English English. "Gotten" is actually part of old-fashioned English, and is still used certainly in Yorkshire and the North-East. I presumed that the whole of the North would use it. I added a reference from the Yorkshire Dialect Society for this.

I did not change the part about Michelle Holmes, although I disagree with your edit. I think that Rochdale is hardly distinguishable from the western fringe of Yorkshire around Halifax/Huddersfield. To me, Oldham is more clearly Lancs. You mention rhoticity for east Lancs. According to the British Library, rhoticity can be found in a Bolton accent and nearby, and also in an Oldham accent. Note no rhoticity in the Rochdale one. Michelle Holmes has been in dozens of Yorkshire programmes.

I have not changed this bit though, as I admit to not being an expert on Lancashire.

Please let me know if you disagree strongly with anything that I have written. I would like for someone from Lancashire to improve the Wikipedia pages on the dialect.

Best wishes. Epa101 (talk) 16:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Hello Jimmy Lancashire! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 945 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Mike Graham (journalist) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 11:17, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Weegie[edit]

The article Weegie has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:N

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 11:15, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Weegie for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Weegie is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weegie until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:14, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]