User talk:John/Archive 8
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Proposal
Hello
I was wondering if you were interested in a new proposed WikiProject. It is called Tranport around Glasgow and Edinburgh. The proposal can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Transport around Glasgow and Edinburgh. For the temp page, see User:Simply south/WikiProject Transport around Glasgow and Edinburgh. I was referred to you by Pencefn btw. Simply south 22:13, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Could i ask for your help in setting the page up? I am taking a chance with this page as i have never done a wikiproject before. Simply south 23:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
There is no chance. Only being bold. :) - Samsara (talk • contribs) 00:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- LOL, sure. I would think 6 or 8 people to make it viable though, wouldn't you? --Guinnog 00:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Reasonably, i have 6 right now but am still going to wait for more, possibly. Anyway l
l
\ /
I am now facing problems with the proposal covering more than i originally thought and am querying the name. What do you think this should be called?
I am thinking about those i have put on the proposals page, plus also suggestions of "Scottish Rapid Transit", "Transit\"Tranportation in Scotland"...
I wa also hoping that this wouldn't cover ALL forms of transport although i now don't know what to do. What should happen? Simply south 20:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mediaopedia links - are they spam?
I reverted this guy's edit to Click fraud as linkspam, mostly because the article it linked to was barely literate. Then I looked at the article at another link, Donald Rumsfeld, and it seemed like a real article. Thoughts? --CliffC 13:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mass date delinking
Mr. Mains has returned to his old ways. I am hoping that you will have a word with him about it, and get him to knock it off.Lonewolf BC 09:30, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- (Transferred to here from my talk page. For sake of conversational coherence, please let keep us this on yours. I am "watching" this page, so message-notification is not a problem. --Lonewolf BC)
- Thanks a lot. Can I ask you to get involved in the exercise at User talk:Guinnog/date linking? I'd like to get this finished off in the next days. I feel this could lead us to a proper resolution of this problem. --Guinnog 19:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- I'd be glad to take part in the exercise. Meanwhile, please have a word with Mains. He seems disinclined to listen to me, and there is no way I keep up with the high-volume edits with which he is again pushing ahead -- plus I fear I might get in hot water for "wiki-stalking" if I were to try, being as I am not an admin. -- Lonewolf BC 20:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I have had a word with him. I'll keep an eye out; I really don't want things to turn nasty again. --Guinnog 20:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Ditto that last! -- Lonewolf BC 20:30, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- I've just checked and he hasn't done any more since my last message to him. Let's all keep a cool head here, ok? --Guinnog 20:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Guinnog: it would be helpful if you could dissuade Lonewolf BC from using intemperate and insulting language toward me as he has now done on my talk page and regardless of what are obviously very strong opinions he may have of my work. Thanks Hmains 22:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Talk:Palestine and User Talk:Wood345
Could you please comment on this edit, where you basically confirm that user Woods345 did a page blank, even though the provided diff [1] does not show anything like that? Han-Kwang 21:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC) P.S. Hmm, the offending edit was around the same time as this one where the whole page was replaced by some random other page after doing a section save. When I just looked back, the mysterious diff had disappeared. Most likely not Wood345's fault. Han-Kwang 21:46, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Replaced your fair use image with free image
Hi, I recently replaced your uploaded cover image at The Prisoner of Zenda with an image of the second edition cover of the book per User:Chick Bowen/Bad book covers. A recent cover like yours technically would not be acceptable under the "replaceable" clause of our fair use policy, since the books' original covers, title pages, etc. would be free. Thanks, and I was just letting you know that I did this. QueenStupid 18:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. --Guinnog 18:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] User:Wiki-ov
I didn't see your indef block until after I had left the message on that user's talk page. I think the likelihood of this one being anything except a full-time vandal is about 0.01%. Should that turn out to be the case I'll unblock but I really don't think there was anything wrong with the block :-) Best, Gwernol 19:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- Judging by the latest comment on the talk page (I reverted it) make that 0.0% that this is anything but a troll. The indef block is looking very good :-) Gwernol 19:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] France
User Davdaott has removed enourmus amounts of demographic information and cited statements, is that not vandalism? --r9tgokunks 23:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
I was watching the recent changes for a few refreshes and watched you effectively carpet a vandal. =) Thanks for the entertainment, and for the links to the Political Compass, and for the link to DefendEachOther ... keep up the good work! JubalHarshaw 01:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you very much indeed for your kind words. I did a few today; can you remember which one tickled you so much? --Guinnog 02:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I remember one where the guy had edited his talk page from your warning to "WHO THE FUCK IS GUINNOG" ... I guess he found out, didn't he? JubalHarshaw 04:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Heh. Yes, I enjoyed that one too! --Guinnog 05:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Following your good example, I've been doing a bit of vandal fighting myself lately, and my user page got vandalized for the first time! I must be doing something right! JubalHarshaw 04:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Project
I have now decided to rename the project to Transport in Scotland (after caving in). This is going to be very broad but i have stated it will focus primarily on public transport. Do you think this is going to be any good? I have also made a start on the sub-page. Simply south 12:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Sorry if i keep bothering you. Just to say that i have gone ahead and now it is under Wikipedia:WikiProject Transport in Scotland. Simply south 12:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Humourous
You claim that this is the worldwide correct pelling of Humourous please provide evidence to support this claim.--Lucy-marie 17:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for clearing up this issue--Lucy-marie 17:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bennett's Tree-kangaroo
Why have you removed the two photos of Bennett's Tree-kangaroo which I recently posted there at the request of the photographer? I will restore them to the article. If you think they still shouldn't be there - please have the courtesy to discuss it with me first on my Talk page. Yours John Hill 21:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] More on Bennett's Tree-kangaroo
Thanks for your prompt reply. Sorry - that appears to have been my fault. Sandy Lloyd (the photographer) has said that she is really happy for the photos to be used and I discussed with her previously that they would then become available to anyone to download and use. She was happy with this. I just was not aware that the copyright tag I chose was not sufficient for them to be posted. I have now tagged them as GFDL. If you think there is still some problem would you please let me know? Thanks, John Hill 22:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Pleae
[edit] The Genius Club
Why did you delete our image? We're part of the production company and we OWN the image. Please don't do this again. Thank you!
[edit] Hoping for your assistance
(Please reply here. I've got your page on watch. -- LW 00:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC))
I've run afoul of an admin who's causing me some trouble. For example, he's been messing with my talk page by posting "warnings" against things I've not done, and commanding me not to remove them. You seem like a reasonable fellow, and I'm wondering if you might help me out. Just some advice on where I stand would be good, and pointers on where I might take things. If you you care to give it, a the perspective of a fair-minded third party would be useful, I think -- just told to me, if you'd rather not get in the middle. This is weird. I really have to wonder how this guy got his stripes. Anyhow, please let me know if you can assist -- or point me to someone else, if you'd rather. -- Lonewolf BC 00:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- (Oops. I too slow. I trust you won't mind the transfer -- LW, 00:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC))
- Thanks for your message. I will have a look and see what I can do. --Guinnog 00:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thanks much. -- Lonewolf BC 00:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Tyroneandkerryflags.jpg
Why did you remove the speedy tag , i was under the impression that non commercial image where not allow on wiki . When i uploaded this image it wasn't tagged as non commercial but is now (Gnevin 01:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC))
[edit] Nurse Anesthetist
The page Nurse Anesthetist has had its images deleted twice by wiki editors, lastly you. I have recieved full permission to display the images on Wikipedia from the copyright owners. I have sent the permission letter to Wikimedia. I have approprately discribed the permission and use in the upload system. I cannot understand what is going on!! Please tell me in plain english why they are being deleted, and what I am doing wrong.Eclipse Anesthesia 13:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image Uploading
So what exactly was the problem with my uploaded image? Not only is it album artwork and therefore under Fair Use (as far as I know), I asked the artist himself for permission to use it. Blutpanzer 02:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Much appreciated. Blutpanzer 02:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Ed Stelmach.jpg
Recently you removed a speedy delete nomination form this image leaving "?" as an edit summary. The messege in the nomination was that a copy exsists on commons. That is to say wiki commons. Since a copy exsists on Wikicommons the Wikipedia copy is redundant. However, I have not replaced the nomination since the image is currently up for AfD there. Kc4 06:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for explaining that. Let me know if you need it deleted again. --Guinnog 06:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mike Campese
What is going on with this guy? I happened to notice your removing him from guitarist lists, and I followed to see the ping pong routine on his article with the image, and also the repeated deleting and recreating of said image. This last time, he uploaded it with the GFDL-self tag. --Ars Scriptor 15:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- No, I've never heard of him. Of course, that doesn't really mean anything. Between WP:AUTO and the not-quite-notability, I think it's a candidate for deletion. --Ars Scriptor 19:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rafikilives's block
Can I ask why you banned Rafikilives permanently? I'm pretty sure my warning only made it onto his talk page after his second act of vandalism. His two vandalisms of John Prescott appear to be his only post so it seems unfair (if true) to characterise it as a 'vandalism only' account. Should he/she not have been given the opportunity to contribute more positively. WJBscribe 22:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Royal Holloway
Hey, my intention is to make a small photo gallery of the campus and proposed changes to the Royal Holloway campus. I have emailed both the college and the students union who have provided me with the images I am trying to upload. They have given total freedom for these images to be used. No strings attached. Please tell me what I have to do (without referring me to some page about a mile long, I don't have that much free time to read it :-) to be able to complete this task. I am not a Wikipedia expert, the only page i edit is the RHUL one. I am a student there. Any help you could provide would be helpful, you know what you're doing, I don't. Thank you, looking forward to your help, and all the best!!! --Pbss08 11:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Barnstar
My userpage is animated now! I don't hate barnstars, and I'm flattered and very happy to get one. Thank you thank you. :) --Galaxiaad 02:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dj fatu deletion
While the guy probably isn't notable enough to have a page here, I have restored the page anyway, as it was speedy tagged by a troll sock that disrupts WP:PNT by tagging all pages that we are deciding whether or not to translate for speedy deletion. If you see a page in a foreign language tagged for speedy by a new account with a random letter username, please don't delete it, but rollback and block the sock (or tell me). Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 21:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject Scotland
Guinnog, can you help me with the Scottish Borders article - I am considering taking it to peer review, would this be a good suggestion?? Thanks, --SunStar Nettalk 22:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] the kode
why was the topic about the kode (band)deleted? there was nothing bad about it. i was just doing it for a friend. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abarry12 (talk • contribs) 22:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Peer review on Scottish Borders
Scottish Borders is up for peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Scottish Borders/archive1. Please feel free to comment. --SunStar Nettalk 17:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Set in Darkness
Good point - I should have included a reference. I think there may have been a quote from the poem printed just inside my copy of the book, but I'll have to check that as my memory isn't photographic. I know that the poem itself contains the line - here is a copy. I've found an interview where his answer about the title gives a fuller quote that also matches the poem. Thanks for pointing out the lack of references for my contribution - I'll amend the article to include those references. Autarch 19:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Interesting - I seem to have the opposite tendency - when I first read The Lord of the Rings I even read the intro!! Mind you, sometimes there can be info tucked away on the copyright page - alternate titles, for example. Autarch 19:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I also edited the pages Ian Rankin and Black and Blue (novel) to mention The Dancing Pigs - both interviews mention them, so I figured I'd add the information. So you've also encouraged me to improve a couple more articles. Autarch 20:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Assistance
Left you a mail + Ceoil 21:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006
The December 2006 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Concorde page move
I moved it because it was one of the only aircraft articles that did not conform to either "(Manufacturer) (Model)" or to the DoD naming scheme. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 04:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] You are welcome!
Being swift or belated is not the matter. Somehow you got remember that someone have revert your vandalized userpage :-) So I'm glad about it. Happy editing!!! ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 18:54, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rachael Ray Sucks
I noticed that you deleted this article once already as an attack page. It was recreated, and another admin decided to put it up for AFD instead of speedying it. You might want to delete it again and protect. Just a heads up. 66.35.138.9 20:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Help Please
I am really confused about the fair use thing, I have images and own the copyright what do I do to stop you from deleting them I tried a lot of ways even suggested tags. I sure its really simple and I’m keen to learn. Thanks Chris Follows 22:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
We can't use copyright images here, except under the provision of fair use. Can you please not upload any more material which breaks our rules. Thanks --Guinnog 16:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I deleted another image you uploaded after I left you this message. Again, please read our image upload policy; it will save you and me both some time if you upload images properly. Please ask me for help if you need it. --Guinnog 17:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Literary spamming?
I note that new user 196.219.136.30 has introduced quotes from "Fady Bahig's novel The Journey of The Fool" into seven of the eight articles he has edited so far. Official thoughts on this? --CliffC 01:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Looks like a non-notable book and author - if you suggest edit-summmary wording, I'll clean these up myself. --CliffC 01:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Guinnog, thanks for the message and good example. I'll handle more of these on my own. As a matter of fact I just cleaned up after this probably well-intentioned person. On more-sensitive issues like the Mediaopedia links mentioned above I'll still defer to you. --CliffC 05:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
(18 days later) I've reverted some more-recent "Fady Bahig" additions as NN several times, in several articles, under several IPs (diffs [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] and possibly others); it's become something of a game. Today some of the reverted text resurfaced in talk page Talk:Portrait with similar text, but apparently posted by legitimate user User:The stuart. Does this material belong anywhere in Wikipedia? Thanks for your advice. --CliffC 04:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] User Speedreed
...has been vandalizing since 30 November, four warnings issued, needs a timeout? Thanks for looking at these. --CliffC 01:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Talkpage
I saw that you removed my comment....and rightfully so, but you and I both know that is the truth and that is part of the reason of why he is leaving and that if nothing is actually done about it we'll be losing plenty more.--Jersey Devil 08:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- G, This is a serious question: Then why do you tolerate the ridiculously rude behavior out of Seabhcan? Morton devonshire 09:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bahig
Hello, Thanks for the message that you have left me in my page. Sorry for not putting this message in the right place (your talk page is large and i am still new and confused) I just wanted to tell you why i reversed. The quote on Taboo was (imho) very nice, it totally materialized the subject that's why i reversed it. I think (and that's not obligatory) that the quotes should better be judged by their value than by the person who said them, I can't start an article on Mr/Mrs Bahig because i don't know much about that person, and perhaps it'd be deleted as well.
Best wishes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.219.136.30 (talk • contribs)
[edit] Many thanks
Will give your advice a go, and re-read the image use policy, I should understand it a bit better this time, all the best Chrisgo 12:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Your date-linking article
Thanks for your nice comments on my talk page, Guinnog. Yes, even with decoupled linking and autoformatting syntaxes, there'll still be debate about which chronological items are worth linking. I do wish that the chronological articles were better.
The new syntax won't affect the tension between pro- and anti-linkers; that debate will continue, and your article may help to clarify the issues. Tony 10:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I don't know how to delete stuff, but...
...please look at User:Vikasramachandran. First few changes were funny, but now it's turned darker and there's a phone number. --CliffC 18:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] France
Hi
I've reverted a couple of your edits recently. Can you explain what you mean about nonsense please as just changing the article with an edit summary including that word is less than compelling. Thanks, --Guinnog 19:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- No problem, i thought it was obvious. Meithal 20:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] History of electrochemistry
I found this article under the backlogged "Articles needing copyediting" and had a go at it. Would you give it a look and see if the tag can come off? I sure fixed a lot of links and typos, and rewrote a lot of sentences (at least in the first 3 sections). I'm wondering if every single year mentioned needs a link, even though this is a timeline article. Anyway, let me know what you think and if it's good I'll take the tag off. Gaviidae 17:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- I see you changed "aluminum" to "aluminium" which is also correct but British/Commonwealth spelling. Do you think the rest of the article should be Britishised then? So far all the -izing and -ized endings are with z. I could make them with s and add u's to -or if you think it's better. I wasn't sure because even though a lot of the scientists involved were Europeans, I dunno how the article was originally written (commonwealth or US). Lemme know, thx Gaviidae 12:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Serial vandal User:209.80.184.4 strikes again
Alvin York this time, just silliness, but has had several warnings. Sorry to be a pest. --CliffC 19:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reply for you
Reply for you by email. FT2 (Talk | email) 05:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reply regarding france image
If it's image quality that concerns you, then I won't stop you. I was worried you were incorrectly concerned with copyright. Sorry for the misunderstanding, i kan reed 18:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] What?
DId you read what I wrote on Sarah's talk page, and if is, why the flip response to me? Sarah just said there wasn't any WP:Office on this article. I believe she is correct. Yet an admin (Samir) removed my comment for WP:Office - when there was none? I am protesting the action of an admin (Samir) who assumed there was a WP:Office (when it does not appear there ever was). I can't ask Tyrenius about the action of another admin, now can I? I also asked Samir, for what it is worth, but do not expect a civil response from him. Oh, and is there a rule that I am not aware of that says I cannot ask questions about an action taken? Or am I being uncivil for asking? If I sound frustrated, I am. This is truly ridiculous.Jance 05:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thank you. I think my note to Sarah said it all. I found it odd that an admin (not Sarah) removed a message that violated no rule, and surely no Wiki WP:Office as he claimed. In the scheme of things, it is a minor but annoying point. It has been an ongoing battle with an editor who wrote the article on G Patrick Maxwell, among others. I hope that someone/anyone will look at these articles and do something, as anything I do is reverted by Oliver. Come to think of it, anything anyone does is reverted by Oliver. On another article, he called an epidemiologist a "3rd party" who should not be allowed to edit because she "lobbies all over the world" against his favored topic. The "3rd party" was telling, since that usually suggests one who is not a party to a contract (okay, that is my background coming out). But I suspect that 'outsider' would be a colloqual understanding of the term "3rd party". I wasn't aware that there were 3rd party editors in Wikipedia. This has been a 'Wiki" learning experience - in the last several months, I have found a small handful of people (Including a couple of admins) who behave like a bad condo board. The 'politics' I have seen here may be pettier, presumably because there is so little at stake. And for that reason, I leave it in the hands of others (including you, if you are interested) who can take a look for themselves. Jance 08:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] David Irving Edit
Hello, you recently reverted an edit I made to David Irving's profile, describing him as a historian and not a holocaust denier. Thank you for pointing out that the subject has already been discussed at length. I have now read the comments in his discussion page, and I was wondering if you could clarify something for me. It appears that most commentators are of the opinion that the neutral-sounding "historian" is more appropriate to an encyclopaedia than the emotive and subjective term "holocaust denier". Surely it is appropriate in a controversial case to ensure that the majority view is reflected? How can you be sure that your personal views on the subject do not outweigh your responsibilities as a Wiki admin? Johnx10 19:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your polite reply on my discussion page, outlining the fact that since Irving has been convicted of holocaust denial, this is how he should be described by Wikipedia. Unfortunately this logic is inconsistent with other entries in Wikipedia. Consider the case of Mike Tyson. Using your logic, he would be introduced as an American rapist, and not as a boxer, due to his conviction for rape. Nelson Mandela would be introduced, unacceptably, as a terrorist. There are many other examples, as you will be aware. I ask you simply to apply the same logic in this article as in other Wiki articles, and list the individual according to his primary activity, and not according to the name of a conviction. Sorry for clinging to this issue, but I use Wiki extensively and want to be sure that the admins hold to a neutral and consistent viewpoint. Johnx10 22:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Thanks for warning about the images. I took them off my page. Andrew Winston 05:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vandal
I am reporting 72.10.104.33 who has got a string of edits. ### 89.240.161.35 16:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for the quick block
Thank you for the quick block of 63.113.199.109; that guy's been running amok for a while now. Hopefully, he'll think twice before going on another vandalism and personal attack rampage. --JFreeman (talk) 21:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Clash
Yeah, I'm not quite sure why a link to a Clash web site is "inappropriate" on a page about the Clash. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swessell (talk • contribs)
- It really doesn't add much to the article, it's a Geocities site, it has been removed several times already. --Guinnog 15:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image copyright
Image copyright and fair use is complex stuff. On the other hand Bluebaramundi is trying it on and about 1 edit away from an indef block... No worries about the bot editing conflict, there was a lot of edits coming in very fast for a while there :-) Best, Gwernol 04:27, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] British replacement of the Trident system
Thanks for your improvements to this article. === Vernon White (talk) 21:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dickens
Please refrain from making any further edits like this one: [7]. UK English is perfectly ok in an article about a British writer. Thanks. --Guinnog 05:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Dear Guinnog, OK, we can leave it in the U.K. English form, if it so disturbs you otherwise. However, it's my humble understanding that U.S. English is the standard for this version of Wikipedia. --Tito4000 23:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- If this were the case, then a lot of us users of British English would move out! === Vernon White (talk) 00:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Tito4000, your humble understanding is not in accord with Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English. If you wish to write in USian, you're free to do so on your own patch. .. dave souza, talk 00:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Dear Guinnog, Vernon, and Dave: Touché! I yield to your well referenced explanation. I'm sorry for the humble misunderstanding on my part. As Guinnog correctly pointed out, my editing was in fact specifically out of line. And Vernon, please don't move out! I promise I won't let my hand do that again when I'm on edition mode. Sorry folks, no harm meant. Happy holidays! --Tito4000 19:14, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Size
A little empathy, please. I'm sick of people quoting references they did not read. Thank you. RCS 07:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
- Telling people, as a general rule, not to revert right information under righteous pretexts. This morning was the third time i had to correct Will Sampson's height. Some people just won't believe he was "only" 6ft5 and not several inches taller. Same - worse - for Uday Hussein. Some bloke who brings in an article saying he was "almost 2 meters" tall (6 ft 7) keeps on making him a staunch seven footer. Talk about not getting angry ! Have a nice day. RCS 07:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Quisling
Please explain why you removed "The term is thus equivalent to the American Benedict Arnold. " from the Quisling article. -Sensemaker
I got rid of the comparison because I didn't think it added anything to the article, as above. It seemed somewhat OR to me, and also rather Americocentric in an article about a European politician. I hope that makes sense.
- It does make sense (i.e. it is not self-contradictory), but I find it hard to agree with the assessment anyway. I'm not American (and have only visited the US once, briefly), I'm Swedish, so it's kinda odd to be accused of being Americocentric. The reason I put it in is that every European I have told about the expression "a Benedict Arnold" has immediately understood what I meant when I said it was an American version of "a Quisling" and vice versa (I have American acquaintances online). They all found it enlightening and interesting. When I first learned of the expression "a Benedict Arnold" I certainly found it interesting. I do believe it adds something to the article. An American immediately understand how the term works because he can compare it to a common American word and a European gets to hear about an interesting parallell that he can look up in a link. If you hadn't known already about the expression "a Benedict Arnold" wouldn't you find it interesting to read that there is another person whose name has become synonymous with "traitor". In Sweden, occasionally the word "Cronstedt" has been used in a similar way but it would be a lot less common than either of "Quisling" or "Benedict Arnold" so I didn'r really bring it up. -Sensemaker
[edit] Irving
Though your wiki'ing is prolific and to be respected, your rv'ing of my edits to the Irving lead is perhaps heavy handed. Last year I brought the article from a jumbled mess of libelisms and bias to a respectful, well-rounded well-structured article. I see the structure remains -- somewhat -- to this day. Please read my notes at the bottom of the discussion page before undoing my redo :) Danke
- I did. Please read my comment there. --Guinnog 17:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thank you for warning Meeptastic
Thank you for blocking the vandal Meeptastic. I'm new to Wikipedia and had been researching how to deal with vandalism for the last 30 minutes. Then I saw that you warned this user. Someone else also blocked the user, and someone else deleted this user's latest vandalism. Great community effort!! Vchao 18:27, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Murder death kill kill kill
Hiya. I reverted your changes to the 9/11 page a while ago - but please don't take it personally (and, just so you know, my revert was itself reverted). I think I was thrown off by a photo caption that was also edited (maybe), and right now I have more pressing things than going back in the history to figure out exactly what was running through my head that night. Your edit was right. My revert was wrong. Thanks for your dedication to several of Wikipedia's more controversial articles. --Action Jackson IV 19:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] answers
I will answer your questions, as always. I feel no need to answer Rebecca's bad faith, insulting comments. What is your question at this point? You should also know by now that she will accept nothing less than 100% of what she wants: no date unlinking unless she approves of them, one by one. All other conversation with her is rather pointless, given her position, attitude and disruptive behavior. Hmains
- I see you both accusing each other of bad faith. I have expended considerable effort over time in trying to analyse the sort of edits you were falling out over. It may be that I have failed. Let me think about it. --Guinnog 08:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- If you want to write an answer that you yourself and other editors could live with, let me see it. If ok to me, I would use that answer as mine. Then you can see what Rebecca thinks of it. Hmains 19:09, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, good suggestion. --Guinnog 19:14, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I have said time and time again that I have absolutely no problem with people using their discretion as to when to remove date links (as many editors do without incident), and I don't want to have to individually check someone's edits because they are incapable of exercising that discretion. All I'm waiting for is some sign that Hmains intends to actually use that discretion rather than killing each and every date link as in the past. Rebecca 00:57, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ireland
I hope you have seen my contributions the the Ireland discussion page and hope to hear from you your suggestions for a compromise, as that is my intention. Somethingoranother 06:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
My suggestion for the Ireland map showing the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland should say below it: Map of Ireland showing the state of Republic of Ireland and the UK province of Northern Ireland. What's your view on this? Somethingoranother 07:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
My suggestion for the beginning of the Ireland article is:
What's the your view on this? Somethingoranother 07:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Why does everything I contribute to the Ireland page always seem to get reverted? Am I not allowed to contribute? Plus how is the image redundent? And I'm not even allowed to write UK below a map, which means this is getting to a point of being ridiculous where I'm not even allowed to contribute Somethingoranother 08:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Look I've contributed to loads of articles over the past year and I've never, never had such a to do over contributing where I'm just not allowed to contribute anything at all, as I haven't been allowed to with the Ireland article. And then to be threaten with being blocked if I don't obey and actually being blocked is to be honest I'm being oppressed here and when the contributions I'm wanting to make are so minor it's just ridiculous. As for getting general consesus it seems only to be you and your friend who's even bothered about me making contributions to the article and it would appear the only consensus I can get is from you as there's no one else to get consensus from because they're simple not bothered about me making such minor contributions. If it really is that you seem to have some domination over the Ireland article and are preventing others from contributing to it then I see no choice but to report this to other Administrators and as high as I possibly can take this complaint. Somethingoranother 09:17, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- I see you've already taken the matter to WP:AN/I where it has been dealt with accordingly. Please try to engage with the editing community rather than simply reverting to your POV again and again. The matter is now on the relevant talk page, so engage with folks there. Let's try to work together on this one - Alison✍ 11:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] My editor review
Hi. Just wanted to say thanks for taking time out to review me and for your positive feedback. Good to know that a long-standing admin okays my handiwork. Thanks! Zunaid©Review me! 10:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Is there spam on a talk page?
On the page "Talk:Skip (container)" the owners (or staff) have put a link to a website for a skip magazine. If it was on an article page I would delete it, but I am not sure to do that same on a talk page. My impression is that the link was spam, that it is not notable and that it should be deleted. The user page of the editor states that it is their website, so a polite message may be appropriate. What are your observations? ### 84.13.182.137 13:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reverting
will you please stop chasing all the articles I contribute towards and reverting them!!!
- Will you please start following the advice you have been given about how to edit the encyclopedia properly? --Guinnog 22:24, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I notied you've never contributed toward the Argentina article before until I did then within minutes you reverted my change. PLease don't continue some sort of thing on here where you just chase me reverting all me edits. I have not reverted any of yours.
- How rude. Actually, Argentina was on my watchlist as I edited it a while ago. I have not made any POV-pushing edits in defiance of consensus, so there would be no reason for you to revert me. You are heading for a long block if your poor behaviour continues. Is that what you want? --Guinnog 22:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
You've really got it in for me haven't you? Somethingoranother 22:31, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- No. I'm trying to do my job as an admin. --Guinnog 22:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
The what was wrong with the map I put on the argentina article? I've seen the discussion page and no one has any objections so please leave me alone one here please
You say I'm spreading my POV isn't having a map which shows the falklands as part of argentina POV? I simply change the map so this wasn't so anymore. So you're saying I can't changed the map to the map from the CIA world fact book which I used before? Somethingoranother 23:09, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- You seem confused. The effect of your edit (which you repeated three times) was to remove the CIA map and replace it with one without copyright info and in a deprecated file format. --Guinnog 23:11, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
the previous one was changed to show falkands in same colour as argentina. the one I put up is an unedited one from the CIA fact book Somethingoranother 23:17, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- In that case you need to learn how to use copyright tags properly. All images used here must be tagged appropriately. Uploading images without a tag just makes work for someone else who will have to delete them. --Guinnog 23:19, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
ok thanks for the tip Somethingoranother 23:21, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Nice one
Just wanted to thank and congratulate for the skillful edits in your recent changes to David Irving. Johnx10 07:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Userbox Migration with Auto Wiki Browser and the principle of RegExTypoFix
I have been thinking about this subject and have posted some ideas at User:Flutefluteflute/AWB, RETF & UBM. Please give your comments on the talk page of that page. Flutefluteflute Talk Contributions 13:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RE:GAA
No problem , accidents happen (Gnevin 21:11, 24 December 2006 (UTC))
[edit] Irving
Thanks for your note. Great minds think alike, because I was intending to leave a note for you thanking you for breaking the logjam by shortening the lead to the basic facts and making it much more readable. I hope I haven't lengthened it too much, and if I have, feel free to tweak away. :-) SlimVirgin (talk) 23:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hmains
That still isn't going to work, as he's still entirely free to shoot each and every date link on sight, as he's always done. The onus should not be on me to make him provide justifications for his edits - he should provide that himself, and if he doesn't have one, he shouldn't be making them. "Taking into account the value" will simply be interpreted as "I can kill them all as I don't think they have any value", just as before. Rebecca 00:55, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm. It was hard to write a form of words I thought you could both live with. I worried that you might not find it acceptable. I'm afraid it seems I was right to be worried.
- Would you trust me just to "enforce" the spirit of the agreement then? I know I came at this from a very different angle than you, but I hope I know your objections well enough to keep check that someone is keeping to the spirit of an agreement, and I hope you trust me to do that faithfully to the best of my abilities, which I would certainly undertake to do.
- It would be personally very satisfying to me to wrap this up today, if we can all three agree. Although I am not a Christian myself, I recognise the nice symbol that getting this resolved on Christmas Day would constitute.
- I would furthermore say I'd like to enlist both of you to help me in the New Year to take this whole argument forward even further with the aim of using our findings here to try to improve the MoS guidance to prevent such disagreements from happening in the future. --Guinnog 01:09, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- We need to come up with a permanent resolution - if Hmains starts (as he seems to be preparing to do, based on his refusal to state anything to the contrary despite numerous opportunities) to kill all on sight, then it's a hell of a job for you to try to keep him in line. See my comments above (in the "answers" section): all I need is a promise that he'll use his discretion, not kill each and every date link, and provide reasoning apart from "it's a date link". Rebecca 01:24, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Ok. I'll amend the proposed text I am asking him to agree to. Don't worry about the workload; I am a 'holic anyway and it wouldn't be that onerous to check a user's contributions every day or two. --Guinnog 01:29, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thanks, ejnoy also. Hmains 05:49, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
It's still too weak, and too much has happened for me to trust that Hmains in particular could abide by the spirit of this; this still allows him to delete virtually everything he comes across, as long as he "gives proper consideration" to potentially leaving some in place. What he should be doing is determining which - and not according to his "all must die" criteria - provide some use to other readers - and leaving them the hell alone. This has not proven difficult for anyone else (and there are many); Hmains is the only person who has had trouble with keeping anything, and with his refusal to make the slightest claim to the contrary, please excuse my cynicism. I just don't think you can legislate good judgement. Rebecca 20:32, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
- I will undertake to help ensure that good judgement is employed. Guinnog 20:57, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
A major part of the problem is that Rebecca does not have the facts. My edits to dates are part of the overall copy-editing I do to articles I choose to work on. This is a fact she will not accept, and which you seem to accept just on her say so--unless you are just trying to make her feel good. As for the other editor who periodically jumps in, I do not believe I should have to put up with his insulting statements regarding the quality of my editing. Copyediting is not writing, and I am doing copyediting. Something he seems unable to accept or understand. Hmains 03:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Please see my comment at User talk:Guinnog/date linking. I meant no disrespect to you in what I wrote to Rebecca above. Thanks for taking part. --Guinnog 03:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
No, no. I was thinking of them, not you. You have tried really hard and your efforts are appreciated. My only comment to you is you tried reason to deal with unreasonable people. I do not find that works often. Other Admins have tried dealing with her by reason; they failed also. I just want protection from the predations of Rebecca. I notice she only targets non-Admins, those who cannot protect themselves. In other words, bullying and attacking the defenseless. Thanks again. Hmains 05:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Your edit to User talk:SlimVirgin
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I specifically wrote "Anyone who tries to poison that well of verifiable truth is committing a grave sin against history and must be treated as such" (emphasis added). If there is a difference between "verifiable truth" and "accuracy," I am not familiar with it. I did not mean to offend and I certainly did not mean to come across as a "true believer." Would it make you feel better if I replaced the word "truth" with "accuracy?" --GHcool 19:04, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Important additions needed!
Dear Guinnog, I talked to Painman before and I have no clue what happened to him. But could you please add the most important facts in Marilyn Monroe history--the lawsuits against the fraud that has been committed under and with her name! With the support of Anna Strasberg, who has been sued by four photographer's estates. Wikipedia took tons of info of my first blog exposure on blogcritics.org. I can tell you exactly what. But when I try to inform the world about the latest happenings you just erase the entire post? Why? Do you see yourself as Wikipedia-police or something? You guys posted other important information that I discoverd in 13 months of hard and unpaid work. The lawsuit against Mark Roesler, the estate lawyer is happening on May 7, 2007. You think that this is not important? All the other important info, what about that? I gave you my email address before and here it is again. This is very important, as people need to see beyond the beauty of an American legend. They must be warned about the fraud and about the people who have been caught. That is another Wikipedia fact. So, why are you erasing it constantly? You got so many awards, could you please read the piece, go through it and post it correctly? Tens of thousands of Marilyn Monroe fans will thank you for it! If you would please email me, I will send your the entire piece again. Thank you & Merry Christmas. mailg4@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.168.210.190 (talk • contribs)
[edit] From Gaviidae
I've left some comments on talk History of Electrochemistry and some changes. Come see what you think. Also, Holidays++ Gaviidae 10:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Blanking Yada Yada on Evolution talk page
With respect, how did blanking Yada Yada on the Evolution talk page help? While the complaint is no doubt malicious, and many of the comments less than polite, you have effectively made the case for the complainant. I invite you to revert. --Michael Johnson 03:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ok. --Guinnog 03:20, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thanks. Actually this stuff is a pain in the A. However it occurs all the time on this page, and unless handled carefully just promotes more of the same. Cheers, --Michael Johnson 03:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Which Simon Gilbert is which?
An AfD tag may have been used accidentally incorrectly (but in good faith) and "user:spunko" deleted the AfD tag on the "Simon Gilbert" page. I am not sure if it is a vanity page or not. I am not sure if the page as it currently stands about a journalist is notable. I will be grateful for your observations. Note that the page was changed from a page about a drummer on 10 November 2005 to a page about a journalist. The current "What links here" list are relevant for an eminent drummer, but the current page is about a journalist. It is interesting to note that the editor "user:spunko" has also made page edits to the same University that "Simon Gilbert (journalist)" went to (according to the edits anyway). I guess that the one option would be to revert (rather than delete) the page back to the original Simon Gilbert, keep a watch on the page, and give "user:spunko" (a relatively new user) a polite message. My hunch is that it would be better for an administrator to decide what to do, as he has already had a polite message about this. ### 194.176.105.39 12:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. --Guinnog 17:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Creationism
Take a look at Creationism and the venting in the reasons for edits.--Filll 21:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Concordefire01.jpg
I have an intense hatred of seeing the rollback tool used on good-faith edits, but anyway, why did you remove the {{fair use reduced}} tag? The previous version was a 1059x1275, way too large of an image to be constituted as fair use. You already uploaded a smaller version - already replaced - so what is in dispute over the tag? Hbdragon88 03:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, according to the tag, you should delete the old version (the one you uploaded on 3 July) after seven days. Hbdragon88 06:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Protect User talk:Aeldaar...
Hello Guinnog, the vandal that you recently blocked called User:Aeldaar, is IP hopping and vandalizing the warnings left on their talk page. May I suggest protecting the talk page to discontinue this please? Thank you.
- NOTE: As an extra note these are some IP address that I found with the same exact "scum" edits- 86.145.235.50 and 71.227.164.118
¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 06:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Experimentation"
I was not experimenting on John Prescott. Nor was I experimenting on the John Prescott article. Nothing I wrote was untrue, nor was it unencyclopaedic. 80.47.11.158 19:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Referencing my Claims on John Prescott
Is it necessary to reference something when the picture quite clearly demonstrates the man is obese? The adultery claims have been referenced further down. I would be happy to say the obesity claim be dropped as it is self-evident, but I don't see why his titular title of "deputy prime minister" or First Secretary of State is more significant than his status as somebody who has publically admitted deceiving parliament and his wife whilst undertaking an extra-marital affair with an individual (his diary secretary) paid from public money. 80.47.11.158 19:38, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

