User talk:MikeHobday

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello! To create a new message for me, just click here. I will reply here, so do watch this page.



Archives

Welcome!

Hello, MikeHobday, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  — ciphergoth 11:20, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Re: Hare Coursing article

Hello! I was just adding the sources I had found but the electricity here was gone, so wasn't able to do that. Actually I had already found sources of prohibiting coursing in Punjab and Sindh but wasn't able to find a copy of Pakistan Wildlife Protection Act, which I think definitely contains same prohibition as in the wildlife protection acts of Sindh and Punjab. Please look at the article now I have added these two sources, if you want to make some changes please do it. I just tried to respond to the request made at the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pakistan by you. --SMS Talk 19:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Invisible comments

Hello there. Questions such as "When was this? I can find no references, and suspect 1924 or so." are much more likely to get a response if raised on the article's talk page, than if hidden in an HTML comment in the body of the article. --McGeddon (talk) 16:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] League Against Cruel Sports

Mike, is this the updated mission statement? [1] If so, can we incorporate it into the article? Help would be gratefully appreciated. Sue Wallace (talk) 22:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

No, it's just a summary of policy. MikeHobday (talk) 23:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Sue Wallace (talk) 18:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

I've left a considerable number of points on the article's discussion page. I'm concerned that if you don't pick these up soon, the seven-day hold period will be up and the article will fail. Is there a problem? Brianboulton (talk) 23:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Was away for 3 days, now back! Thanks. MikeHobday (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd say we can extend the 7 days by a day or two. Look forward to hearing from you.

Brianboulton (talk) 18:20, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this. Can you take a second look? MikeHobday (talk) 19:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] cockfighting

I have reverted your revert, and I thought it might be polite to inform you, and also inform you why I did so.

I think the statement was most likely correct, however it does seem to be original research and seems to be the sort of statement that is only acceptable when backed up with a citation.

Also I think if it remains then the wording should be a little more neutral, at the moment it seemed to me, to be a justification for cockfighting, or at least it could be read that way.

I welcome your comments regarding my edit, and I am not so arrogant to imagine that I am correct all the time, so I will not take offence if you revert me once more. Sennen goroshi (talk) 09:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Frankly, on that basis, one could delete most of the article. The question, to me, is whether we permit original research on a pro tem basis in order to have a half decent article, or cut it down to a stub knowing that this makes it misleading. The problem seems to me to be that most reliable sources cover countries where cockfighting is banned, and most cockfighting lacks reliable sources. Does that mean the article should not acknowledge it? Personally, I'm not sure at this stage of teh article's development. MikeHobday (talk) 11:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I have no issues with cited quotes, or proven facts, even when they push the balance of an article, these things cannot be helped, and facts should not be removed just to balance an article...however, when these are statements they should be worded along the lines of "it has been claimed by (name) that..." if the statement is not attributed to anyone other than the editor, then it has no place in wikipedia. Perhaps a cited quote would solve the problem Sennen goroshi (talk) 16:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MfD User talk:PJHaseldine/Archive 3

Hi Mike,

I'd be most grateful for your keep vote here.PJHaseldine (talk) 19:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello Patrick, nice to hear from you again. If you don't mind, I won't intervene on this. To be honest I neither feel very strongly about the letters nor fully understand what is and what is not appropriate for user talk pages. MikeHobday (talk) 21:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for this reply. The issue has now evolved into whether Wikipedia should continue to host the image of my letter published in The Guardian on 7 December 1988, which I uploaded on 11 February 2006. Background is here, and anyone can join the discussion and vote here.PJHaseldine (talk) 09:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)