User talk:Mais oui!/Archive 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Bioproject

I see what you're doing in the bio project. Should we use the Medieval Scotland project page to list and organize characters related to medieval Scotland in order of importance? BTW, you might like to know of the existence of Template:Scotland-hist-stub Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, started it off: Wikipedia:WikiProject Medieval Scotland/BioProject. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion on CFD

Hi Mais, thanks for the reminder. I saw the nomination had beeen withdrawn last week so didn't do anything. I've now commented and think this is a good example where dual categorisation makes sense, and is also a good compromise. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I'll take the reference to a "heavyweight" Wikipedian as a compliment, not a reference to my sadly expanding waistline :-), although I have never really regarded myself in such lofty terms around here. We all go about our business doing what we do for the best of the project, but thanks anyway. As for numpties and daft brushes, well from what I've seen that's way off the mark. "Stubborn bugger" might be closer, but the dual cat agreement you struck with BrownHairedGirl was an excellent compromise IMO, and may properly blow that particular description out of the water now. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I tried to read the discussion but, to be honest, I think any vote of mine would be based on a rushed analysis of the situation and I'd rather not vote on something so important without clearly having an understanding of the issue , and an orientation towards one of the "sides." Sorry. Nach0king 18:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Long term abuse#Banned User:Irate

I feel your comments here were disingenuous to the historic counties cause. Far from promoting our "agenda", all we seek is for Wikipedia to reflect a NPOV that aknowledges the reality of the historic counties as separate entities from local government, as stated by Her Majesty's Government and "County Councils" themselves on several occasions. As a Scot, why do you have any interest in county boundaries south of the border anyway? In Scotland I believe you have the fortunate situation, as in Northern Ireland, whereby Counties and local government divisions are widely regarded as separate entities. How would you feel if people tried to tell you that "Scottish Borders" was a county? Yorkshire Phoenix (talk • contribs) 08:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

I'm trying to stay out of the issue at the moment. I note this is the section of policy that is relevant in this case : "views that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented except in articles devoted to those views" - for example, we wouldn't mention the fact that some people believe dinosaur bones were created by god in 4000 BC on every article about a dinosaur fossil. Articles about geography should be about geography: geographic revisionism movements can be perfectly well covered in articles about geographic revisionism movements.

Have you seen Template:Yorkshire and Template:Lancashire? Morwen - Talk 09:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I think that'd be original research ;) It is a form of historical revisionism though, as they have come along after the fact and retroactively invented new entities : everyone back in 1889 was perfectly clear that the County of London was a proper, first-class county : contemporary sources show this quite well.
The term administrative county appears to have only invented as a way of saying for example "administrative county of Lancaster": "Lancashire excluding all the county boroughs", contrasting with the term "county of Lancaster" which meant "Lancashire including all the county boroughs, including the southern part of Warrington and suchforth". In Scotland, where this wasn't needed, the terminology wasn't adopted.
Later, in the 1960s or 1970s, groups were set up by people resenting the Local Government Act 1972 etc, reacting against reform in their area, and therefore promoting the idea of "traditional counties", which they soon found had been tampered with over the preceding years. So they then did research and synthesised, then, a unified set of "traditional" counties with an arbritrary cut-off point differing on whom you speak to. I'd be very surprised if the idea of a still-existing set of N traditional counties, ignoring any boundary changes since the 19th century, predates 1965 (can we find any statements that "Caversham is really in Oxfordshire" before then, for example?) And of course governments were giving statements on the issue, once it had arisen: it's a quick way to shut people up: how can legislation affect the existence of a supposed set of "traditional counties" when the idea of "traditional counties" was invented in the 1960s/1970s by some activists? The statements, when closely examined, are all very carefully worded, but almost non-sequiturs once you realise this.
Of course none of this is documented (for entirely sensible reasons: the youth of the movement would rather undermine their argument of continuity) Morwen - Talk 10:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RSPCA reversion 25th June - response please

Hello again - I find it perturbing that you have not replied to my messages. I have posted another message on Talk:Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. I would appreciate a response, either on that page or on my own talk page User talk:Ballista. Thanks - Ballista 09:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for rapid response. See [[1]] and look at your 25th June edit. I am asking why such a total reversion occurred, without discussion. Previous messages can be found in your User talk:Mais oui!/Archive8, headed 'reversion' (item No 28). - Ballista 10:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
OK thanks - please go to the RSPCA discussion page again, to see some references, although I didn't consider them necessary at the time, as the potential for conflict of interest, in each case, was painfully clear without. - Ballista 10:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC) PS sorry, obviously omitted to hit 'save page' button & I lost them, in my haste to respond to new message. I'll go back and rework it. Please allow 5 mins - Ballista 10:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wekepedians

Just FYI:

You'd be best to stay well clear, just leave Mallimak to continue digging their own hole. /wangi 08:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Biography WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of biographies.

A few features that you might find helpful:

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

  • Starting some new articles? Our article structure tips outlines some things to include.
  • Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every biography article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! plange 15:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ouch

This should probably be redacted. Even if you're 100% correct, the tone is just wrong, and doesn't make you look too good. As you don't know me from a bar of soap, I will take it not amiss if you ignore this unasked for advice. - brenneman {L} 08:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

redact = "frame: formulate in a particular style or language; "I wouldn't put it that way"; "She cast her request in very polite language".
On a scale of 1 to 10, my diplomacy skills are about 2. I am very, very pissed off, and quite frankly I have not got the skills to say what I want to say in flowery language. Given this, I have just deleted the whole damn thing. If she is ever going to apologise, then she will do it anyway, without any flowery request for one from me. --Mais oui! 08:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, there is something to be said for knowing when to just erase something you've said. I've only very recently progressed from that skill to knowing when not to say it in the first place. - brenneman {L} 08:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
You are clearly higher up The Ten Bhumi than my good self. I may, one day, reach that state of blissful being where I can just keep my mouth shut. Don't hold your breath. --Mais oui! 08:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Chomp !!
Chomp !!

This might keep you from saying the wrong thing at the wrong time :-) BTW, I removed you from Category:British female MPs and commented on the whole shebang. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 09:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Chomp, chomp, thanks for the cookie, although it will destroy my lovely figure. Wow, for a few hours there I had managed to both switch gender and get elected to the Westminster parliament. How thrilling. --Mais oui! 08:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Irate

There is no way in the world that User:Irate should be unblocked. He was banned permanently by Jimbo Wales himself, for his bad attitude and his refusal to follow the rules. This was nothing to do with his edits to county articles: it happened before he ever went near them. Read this for to be enlightened (this was one of his sockpuppets). --RFBailey 08:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Mmmm... OK. I did not know the back-story. It was just a suggestion, but clearly not a very good one. --Mais oui! 08:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Wallace

Oh, sorry for disrupting this. I just edited the way I felt was right. I won't remove it then, although I don't see why Henry II should go, as I already cut the list. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, sorry again. I don't Cromwell should be there either. Look how many English rulers are already there. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
When it comes to political leaders, obviously English leaders will top because England has always been stronger and more able to project power and influence on a wider stage. I'm trying to think of a candidate, but it's tough; maybe James I of England? Sorry, that's the best I can do ATM; I'll give it a thought. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 13:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
What about Columba? Founder of Iona (light of western Europe), converter of the northern Picts, true apostle of Scotland, etc? If we got the Scottish and Irish users behind him, then Columba could be possible. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 09:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd rather see less euroamerocentrism, i.e. more variety on the list. Where are Chandragupta Maurya, the First Emperor, the Hongwu Emperor and Suleiman the Magnificent I ask myself ? The usual pathetic effort I'm sorry to say. I'm off to be bold ! Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Stupid categorisation ! Well, Hongwu I need to add. Bastards ! Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

In 20 years time the boot will be on the other foot, so we may as well get used to a greater emphasis on Asian figures. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biography Newsletter August 2006

The August 2006 issue of the Biography 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. plange 01:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An automated message from Werdnabot

Hi there, I tried to archive your user talk page, but it seems that you have an error in your Werdnabot directive that prevented me from correctly archiving your User talk page. Please review this error, or contact Werdna648 for assistance. Werdnabot (DNBF)/T\C 20:02, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Scotland

I'd be up for that. --Guinnog 20:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colorado Springs Cricket Club

Thanks for creating this stub.

I'm an active member of this club and would be happy to fill in the details.

Abhay Natu

[edit] Scotland

Eh, I woke up half an hour ago to a glowing article about How Wonderful, The Fringe Is Back!, so I'm just being cranky and reactionary ;-) Feel free to revert my changes, I won't fight over them; just a gut feeling stylistically that it didn't improve anything. Shimgray | talk | 13:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reference for Allan Wilson (MSP)

I put the reference you ask for on my talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Allan_Wilson_MSP.

All the gory details are there, (I tend to be a bit "wordy" at times, sorry about that)

After having a look at that which should verify the "football" issue, can we say, simply;

He is married, has two sons, and lives in Kilbirnie. In his free time he is a keen footballer and was appointed chairman of the Kilbirnie Community Football Club committee by the Scottish Football Association.

We would be quite happy with that and could move on to adding "meat" to the article (should we dare).

On that note, see you have added some links, that is great. There is one more that can be added to complete the linking process. (sorry, can't do it myself, rules you know, rules rules rules, ba humbug)

On the line In October 2004 he was appointed Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning. There is a link to an article for "Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deputy_Minister_for_Enterprise_and_Lifelong_Learning

By the way, on a scale of 1 to 10, my diplomacy skill is about 1, welcome to the club. I get pissed off as well though not at you. It is comforting to know I am not alone. I like your style. (fancy a job in the Parliament?)

Allan Wilson MSP 14:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] University of Edinburgh

Why have you restored the massive duplication of the history section?– Smyth\talk 16:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

And what in the manual of style mandates that awkward first sentence for the alumni article? – Smyth\talk 16:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

The first time the article mentions the title, put it in bold using three apostrophes — '''article title''' produces article title. For example: "This Manual of Style is a style guide."

As a general rule, do not put links in
  • the bold reiteration of the title in the article's lead sentence or
  • any section title.
In future, please read the document referred to before queying it. That section is right at the beginning, so you could have found it easily yourself. --Mais oui! 16:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologise, I had looked at Wikipedia:Lead section, which is something of a duplicate. However, I still think "avoid banality" is the most important rule in that section. The repeated text looks ridiculous and unprofessional. – Smyth\talk 18:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC) Please respond. – Smyth\talk 08:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Sorry

I wouldn't consider myself a newbie as such (4000+ edits), I've just never nominated anything for deletion before (least of all a category). No hard feelings though. -- Steel 17:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:inventions

I doubt Scotland's inventions do modern Scotland any good. Being ruled by another country kinda prevents that. Anyways, yeah, I'll try and fix the history section. There are great images on the Picts on wiki now, may wanna use the Hilton of Cadboll Stone image. What d'ya think? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 19:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey they do it for me too. :) BTW, I'm preparing an article on David I at User:Calgacus/David_I.. It should be clean and ready in a few days. Hope to get it to FA stage in time for 1.0. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Non notable club

What do you reckon about the aricle 130th Glasgow Company, The Boys' Brigade? Deletion material? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Agree. I bunged up the {{db-club}} template. --Mais oui! 12:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MPs by Parliament

I have made a suggestion for how to categorise MPs by Parliament: see Category talk:British_MPs#MPs_by_Parliament, and would welcome your comments. --BrownHairedGirl 21:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welsh

Thanks for the (minor) barnstar! I have to say, the Wales vs Welsh people issue is a tricky one. The line between ethnicity and nationality is sometimes quite confusing. My rule of thumb is that Wales is the correct destination, unless particular reference is being made to someone's ethnic background. Are you familiar with WP:DPL? Perhaps you could bring up your concerns there, I'd certainly support you. Soo 10:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Storer Clouston

Weirdly, it looks as if I changed some of your categorisation in my last edit, but I didn't! I will try to fix it and hope you won't need to tidy up after me. I can't understand what happened. --HJMG 16:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Have got cats back to the way you left them now. (I just don't like it when I click 'save page' and unpredictable stuff happens.) --HJMG 16:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Cumberland/Cumbernauld!! No comment - or I'll say something cynical. --HJMG 17:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandal

The user "Yorkshire Phoenix" is going round articles, changing home countries to just UK and you only have to look at their user page to see they are here to push their own POV. What can be done about someone like this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yorkshire_Phoenix_%28194.203.110.127%29—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.207.205.85 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 10 August 2006.

[edit] East Riding of Yorkshire

Hi. Can you please explain your reversion here? I put a lot of hard work into for example researching for example the geology of the area and its coastline and don't understand how "WP:NPA; Yorkshire is in England" is supposed to explain such a reversion. Where am I have supposed to made personal attacks? Morwen - Talk 12:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, if it was by Irate then the edit did indeed need reverting because he is hard-banned. The edit comment was entirely inappropriate, of course. I've not really looked into the start of this. I never got back to you about your message regarding Irate, but he you'd do well to wash your hands of him: he is not going to be a useful ally. Morwen - Talk 12:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and your description of the change from "England" -> "United Kingdom" as vandalism is no more acceptable than his description of your change the other way as vandalism. It's a perfectly legitimate Content_dispute and nobody is vandalising the article. Morwen - Talk 12:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for help on British

Thanks for your recent edits on British. That page was not fun to clean up, and I really liked the clarifications you made there. Keep up the good wiki-work! - grubber 17:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Traditional

Because it's clear that some of the first monarchs there were actually Kings of the Picts, rather than Kings of Scots. "Late Pictland" and "early Scotland" were essentially the same kingdoms. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

No, the list as a whole is "traditional". The alternative is to get rid of the distinction between "Scottish" and "Pictish" monarchs. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 22:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphan Aberdeenshire logo

Hi, I noticed you tagged Image:Gen aberdeenshire logo.gif as not orphan, pointing to Aberdeenshire, but as far as I can see, the image is not being used in that article (only a .png version of it is used)...? --Fritz S. (Talk) 10:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandal at it again

I see this idiot, is still trying to get rid of any references to England:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brampton&action=history

Can't you get banned for reverting more than 3 times within a 24 hour period?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.207.20.156 (talk • contribs) 12:00, 11 August 2006

I attempted a compromise after your first revert and view your subsequent reverts away from the recognised NUTS 1 subdivisions as vandalism, therefore WP:3RR does not apply. Perhaps if you registered you could try following the rules yourself? Or are you permanently banned? Yorkshire Phoenix (talk) 11:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mallimak warnings

reference

I'd just keep an eye on it... If the IP accounts are used to make plainly unconstrutive and disruptive edits then they should be suitably warned, perhaps leading to a ban if the activity continues. If the user account(s) and IP accounts are used in tandem to increase support for a given viewpoint or evaid 3RR then you've got a case for a checkuser. Thanks/wangi 12:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Just another thing - put the edits on the IP user pages themself, not on the (suspected) user's page - if that IP makes repeated vadalism it will be blocked. Yeah? /wangi 00:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Fairy nuff. But as he changes IP address every evening, it does seem a bit long drawn out. --Mais oui! 06:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
I've removed those warnings from Mallimak's talk page. Thanks/wangi 10:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UK on infoboxes

What is the motivation for the reverts to adding UK, with no explanation other than "rv"? Mrsteviec 13:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah I see. You should have simply changed it to something more suitable rather than removing it all together. Mrsteviec 18:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
If unsure I'd suggest discussing it on the relevant template talk page. Mrsteviec 18:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Hehe. I thought that as I typed it. :) However, the Irish situation is more complex and there is some contention that Northern Ireland is not a "country" within the UK whereas there is no such contention with England, Wales and Scotland. Mrsteviec 19:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry..

Oops! Sorry I put the wrong header. However Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Normalmouth which you requested does require some additional info. --Srikeit (Talk | Email) 08:26, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to User talk:Mallimak

Is there any way you two could bury the hatchet? It pains me to see two good editors at each other's throats all the time. --Guinnog 08:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I know what you mean. I find his POV-pushing wearing too. I only mean that he is not a simplistic vandal, and does seem to have knowledge of the subjects he writes about. I do sympathise with you; I just wish that we could turn his energies into more productive directions. --Guinnog 08:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Orkney deletion

Why did you contact me about the Orkney portal? --bdude Talk 09:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

-- OK, thanks bdude Talk 09:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Anti-Orkney attacks on my fellow Orcadians will not advance your causes on Wikipedia I may add. 217.204.65.210 13:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

I figured signatures tell time anyway. ...And Beyond! 17:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UK Geography Terminology

Is it acceptable for Yorkshire Phoenix to be implementing the "NUTS1" category system they suggested, despite no consensus having been met yet? Summertimerolls 16:21, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

It's more acceptable than the attempts of others to impose "home nation" only geography. NUTS1 are real objective subdivisions of the United Kingdom (Scotland is a NUTS1 subdivision), and the United Kingdom is a political reality, unlike the agenda-driven fantasy of those who believe "England" is an international state. Yorkshire Phoenix (talk) 08:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CFD for MPs by Parliament

see CFD for category:MPs of the United Kingdom House of Commons, by Parliament and subcategories. Your comments would be welcome. --BrownHairedGirl 17:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Years in England on football template creating large numbers of red categories

Are you planning to actually create all the categories you have red linked by adding that entry to Template:English football seasons? I hope so. The addition has created a large number of red (worthless) category links. Someone will eventually need to create all those categories, or remove the item from the template. Looking through, it looks like there are over 100 categories that need to be created to accomodate this template link. - TexasAndroid 17:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] By country categories

Without wanting to sound like a stuck record I thought I'd just let you know that I spotted and altered another couple of new category entries for the Home Nations which were inappropriate. Just as before really, keeping a lid on 'by country' whereas nation or less specific doesnt bring the same questions. Keep up the good work by the way. Ian3055 23:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Map

Hi - do you mean how did I create them? I did a quick summary for Hellinterface, [2] of the process. I am happy to give a full rundown of how things are done for you. Once you have created a couple of maps it is quite straightforward. SFC9394 23:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Old dog, new tricks springs to mind! :) Many thanks. If I have probs I'll get in touch (pretty much guaranteed). --Mais oui! 00:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Most referenced articles

Regretably, I will not be able to update this page. Please see meta:Toolserver/Reports. -- Beland 00:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Constituency CfD stuff

Sorry it took me a while to get back, ive not really been very active on wikipedia for the last few months ( only really started properly editing again today). Ive had a read through the discussion and cant honestly come to a strong opinion on what should be done. I can understand the arguments put forward by the two sides and think both have their merits but i really dont feel either is overwhelmingly a greater option than the other so i cant honsetly vote in favour of either. regards, siarach 10:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)