This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
Rock, please read Tznkai's babble here. This c**p is surreal. Sarah777 ( talk) 03:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Rock I went onto my View and edit watchlist and one of the articles watchlisted is now ,,H,A,G,G,Ĕ,R ? (Talk)I don't know which article it used to be any ideas. -- Domer48 'fenian' 21:51, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Is there a contrabutions for ,,H,A,G,G,Ĕ,R ? -- Domer48 'fenian' 22:52, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
The Manifest Integrity Barnstar | ||
For calmness in the madhouse Sarah777 ( talk) 10:25, 1 November 2008 (UTC) |
I know I've been "on your case" a bit recently - so just to let you know my opinion of your integrity isn't diminished though I reserve the right to question your judgment betimes (and only betimes) ;) Sarah777 ( talk) 10:25, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Rock, some tag-team warring here? Clearly the Mooretwin change was of a type that requires prior discussion? (Also the 'reference' given appears to be a dud). Sarah777 ( talk) 12:57, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
You have breeched your 0RR rule on the Article, in addition to the 1RR on the USC. I suggest you stop please. -- Domer48 'fenian' 15:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I did not issue the sanctions, ask SirFozzie he placed you on it. But I do think 0RR means 0RR. -- Domer48 'fenian' 15:41, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message as you took part is a past move request at Flag of Ireland . This message is to inform you that their a new move has been requested GnevinAWB ( talk) 23:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I hadn't gotten to it, I was still waiting on information on possible harassment related to VK that I never received information on when the issue was archived. I'm a bit busy at the moment, I just happened to log in just now for a quick check on the cases I'm clerking, but I'll try to get to it tonight.-- Tznkai ( talk) 19:28, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I just saw your note on my Talk page. I had not looked at the page since May 2008, having abandoned Wikipedia and its "open-source" format to the ill-informed masses. I will, however, have a look at the site you recommended. PhD Historian ( talk) 19:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, You have gone OTT with your revisions to the above articles. Other than one or two "citations needed", there was no need to remove so much of the text that was compiled with great care and without prejudice to either side in the conflict in Northern Ireland (I hope). I would propose to restore some of this unless you want take it to talk. For instance, the section about Murphy wanting to muddy the waters regarding identification as a way of causing doubt in the minds of jurors is fact, referred to in the citation at the end of the next paragraph. If it helps, I'll combine the two in one. And the death of Shaw has been toned down far too much to convey the brutality and viciousness of the killers. Regards, Billsmith60 ( talk) 18:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC). And why remove the cut-throat murders for which the Shankill Butchers are infamous? They are indeed killings but more than the average sectarian murder. Billsmith60 ( talk) 18:55, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
"With his knowledge of police procedure, garnered though attending trials at Belfast Crown Court, it is likely that Murphy was trying to "muddy the waters" as regards identification."
"That decision was to have deadly consequences for many innocent people at a later date"
No offense, but that line would be clichéd in a tabloid report. Its not our job to generate drama using hindsight, we just report what happened when it happened and let the readers draw their own conclusions. I'm happy to discuss examples further on the talk page if you like. Rockpocke t 21:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Wowsers, Wikipiere is stubborn. Phew, thank goodness for Checkusers. GoodDay ( talk) 18:29, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
About 40 of those are not mine. 213.202.149.149 ( talk) 22:47, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
About Mooretwin. Can you sort out these edits by him? http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Amhr%C3%A1n_na_bhFiann&diff=251578896&oldid=251576989 http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=United_Kingdom_of_Great_Britain_and_Ireland&diff=251649432&oldid=251648581 78.16.174.172 ( talk) 11:04, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that Rock, it looked like it was going to hell in a basket. -- Domer48 'fenian' 18:59, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Yet again?-- Domer48 'fenian' 21:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Could you please tone down the semi-protect you put on the Joel McHale article? Three months of semi for four cases of weak BLP violations over one week is excessive and completely against the spirit of Wikipedia. Only a highly contentious article should be granted a semi of that length. Thanks. Ip208man ( talk) 06:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello Rockpocket. Do you remember you said I could come to you if I needed any help? Well, this might not be the kind of help you were referring to. The thing is, I created two tables at the Partick Thistle FC article. One with the top ten appearances which is now complete. The other is the top ten goalscorers. I have completed almost all of the table barring a few of the players career spans. It is now starting to drive me nuts, I seem to be spending forever looking up websites for the information without any luck. I notice from your user page you have edited football articles, which is another reason I have come to you. Now, here's the cheeky bit, HELP! Any help or advice would be very gratefully received and perhaps prevent this user from being taken to the funny farm. I understand you are probably very busy elsewhere so would understand if you did not have the time. Thanks. Titch Tucker ( talk) 07:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Rock, Would you move this page to "Roscommon" please? Some chappie moved it to "Roscommon (town)" - contrary to agreed style. But I couldn't move it back. Extremely irritating that. So I moved it to "Ros Comáin" as a temporary measure. Apparently you need to be an Admin, (for some reason that escapes me) to move a page back to its original name. Sarah777 ( talk) 20:50, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Rock, please see this. Matt Lewis has called me, and/or has implied that I am "right-wing", "racist", "xenophobic" and "hate-centered". Now Rock - this is way beyond the pale. If myself, or any of the other Nationalist Irish editors on a NI article had said anything like that blocks would follow without hesitation. I am reading things into the silence of at least half-a-dozen Admins on whose watch-list I know am - but will resist the temptation to cut loose at The Cabal just now! Sarah777 ( talk) 13:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately you just looked at the one thread, and what you said isn't going to effect anything - not least Sarah leafleting Wikipedia with inflammatory politics. It's not 50/50 thing at all. Whatever I personally say to her wbout how I feel about it, I just deliberately get more of the same, and the deal on Wikpedia seems to be that I (and others) are supposed to just 'put up and shut up'. No and no again, and that kind of privilege sticks in my gullet.
I'm only in this particular talk page because Sarah came here - I'll put this to the 'Troubles' page later on. I know the routes I'm taking, and I stand by what I said at Northern Ireland talk. Although I would have been better simply filing a report, I'm not having my response 'cancelling out' her xenophobia (the word I used - and how can you say it's worse? It is my entire point) - and she knows full well how provocative she is being. My response to her is simply a separate issue. I've actually been extremely tolerant with Sarah on a number occasions, though I more often make the mistake of trying to address her. I've never set out to provoke or offend anyone - and politically, my comments and edits are well within in the rules (and I am including the above in this case). I actual make useful edits on a number of topics, and I am basically a 'benefit' to Wikipedia - so why should I have to read this?
The cancelling-out trick of 'Civility' may well often work in Sarah's favour on this matter, but I'll more than happily accept a block for what I said, if the end result actually meant someone had the courage to deal with her properly. I'd take a long block too, if it would result in cutting out Sarah's anti-British jibes from Wikipedia as well - and I'm not joking one bit. Her intention is to ruffle feathers and offend. Who the hell gave her that remit? It's not just about me - its the effect it has on others too. I just don't want to see it any more - it's never help her own causes, the project certainly, or anything positive I can think of at all. The Ireland naming issue was in a complete hole for a long time with the stupid "British POV" accusation, and it was largely kept there by her casual uncensored comments. It all just creates an atmosphere passers-by walk out of as soon as they walk in. Why do you think so many Irish pages are dominated by same bloody people? Why so many Irish pages are in a mess - I've even done basic edits on some myself, and I have no real interest in doing that at Ireland. At British Isles it can get even worse - with people admitting they don't go there. I didn't ask you to say anything to her personally (or have anything against you personally), but what you said to her above was about as weak as it gets regarding Sarah, and is effectively saying "move on" - but reading again you are not being an admin here, and without doubt I am going to take this on. -- Matt Lewis ( talk) 09:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
People spent hours putting the UKCOUNTRYREFS table together - I can't belive you both haven't seen it? It lists 36 reliable sources for all the Countries of the United Kingdom (where the table resides). I don't see what is different to NI than any other country settled in and made from another. It's hardly a unique occurrence in the world - and it's hardly recent in terms of being British, either. If the UK government (as the sovereign state) says it is a 'country', Wikipedia simply has to go by their word - so only one ref is really needed. I sometimes skirt around calling it a country in comments (use other sentence structures etc) to avoid the chance of distracting debate, but this will be an issue soon at the new country lists. It's much easier if can all agree on it, especially when nothing really is to be gained by disputing it (as with Wales, or anywhere). Anyway - having said that (to Rockpocket as much as Sarah), I'm out. -- Matt Lewis ( talk) 02:50, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Hiya Rock. I just read your "..don't give a sh-t.." comment there. Best chuckle I've had in a long time; Thanks. GoodDay ( talk) 22:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
There he was, behind the door
Eyes glazed
Fighting & screaming across the hall
He wasn't fazed
In his mind, behind the door
The world is great
Nothing ever bother him
As he's baked
But now & then
Without a warning
A loud noice occurs
The wind is blowing
With the passing of the breeze
He's suddenly awake
One couldn't blame, with such a stinch
He's no longer baked.
He could have been the love of her life
Though he looks like a farting junkie
He runs a men's hotel in Brighton town
But to Jeanne he'll always be hunky
Hiya Rock. I don't know how this one is gonna end, but it's sure entertaining. GoodDay ( talk) 00:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
We're not in agreement about everything, but you do appear to be making an honest effort at neutrality over articles relating to the history of Ireland. Any chance you could have a look at the Historical Accuracy section of the talk page for the film 'The Wind That Shakes The Barley'? I'm involved in a dispute over verifiability with another editor, who has asked a couple of buddies to "weigh in" on his behalf. Thanks Thoskit ( talk) 07:01, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. The section wasn't originally my addition - I just thought it worth keeping. Thoskit ( talk) 20:22, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Rock, I hardly feel I deserve it, but it's much appreciated. Happy Thanksgiving to you. Truth be told, I thought you were Scottish, or are you Scottish American? Titch Tucker ( talk) 00:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
This IP is deleting my contributions at Talk:Ireland. This time Rock, I'd appreciate a bit less fence-sitting and a bit more action. If it reverts me again I want a block. Pronto. Tnx in advance. (I don't want/need a sermon on my beheaviour here Rock; OK? Sarah777 ( talk) 21:02, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
I didn't do anything, Sarah. I haven't been on-line all weekend. For future reference, the best way to deal with IPs !voting is to mark their comment with a {{ SPA}} and then ignore them. The closing admin will then give the comment the attention it is due (i.e. not very much). Oh, and another bit of advice: I welcome any editor asking for help with a problem, but I don't respond as well to demands. If you want something done "pronto" you might consider that in future.
Regarding the IPs that have been hassling you, Jeanne. There is a limitation to what we can do, technically, to stop editors from non-static IPs. I can semi-protect your page to stop IPs editing it, but that would stop all IPs, not just this one. If it continues, let me know and I will do that. I would just ignore the allegations on Dunc's page. He is wise enough to see if for what it is, and I expect he will either delete it himself, refute it or just ignore it. Rockpocke t 19:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
FYI Rocketpocket, you may want to take a deeper look in to why I removed Sarah777's comments. See here.
Also, you may also want to familiarise yourself with the distinction between an SPA and an IP-based contributor. Because of ISP technologies such as DHCP, IP-based contributors may not have a very long contribution history, or it may be mixed with the contibutions of other people, but IP-based contributions to polls are just as valid as contributions by any other editor. There are many reasons a person may not want to take an account with WP, but this is still the encyclopedia that "anyone can edit".
I was involved in a dispute over this before. The AN/I thread is here. Can you pay particular attention to comments such as:
One admin has already made a hasty decision tonight, the last thing we want is for another to spread misinformation. Thanks. -- 89.101.221.42 ( talk) 22:18, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
I think it is quite urgent - the longer something gets left for, the harder it is to reverse. The note I left on WP:AN is only for a review rather than a reversal. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 19:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Rockpocket, I imagine that tomorrow morning there will begin the flood of people confused at the move decision. Few will be actually aware of what happened, many may simply believe that consensus on the poll was for a move. Even if the do they won't know where to comment one way or the other: Ireland, Ireland (island), Ireland (state), Republic of Ireland, Ireland (disambiguation), the task force page, Tariqabjotu's talk page, or the AN/I??
I think it would be a good idea to set up an RFC on the decision and post notices of the RFC at each of the relevant pages. For one thing it will keep comments all in one place and allow us to gauge the measure of consensus - which may fall down on the side of 'it happened, leave it alone'. I don't think the RFC needs to be or should be controversially phrased, simple a statement of fact and a plain request for comment, but I think it would be useful as a means to calmly collect the response of community to the decision to move the articles.
As an anon, I do not have privileges to start the required RFC page, so I am asking if you would. (I am going to post a copy of this message on Tariqabjotu's, he may be interested in setting up the RFC himself. In any case his perspective on an RFC would be valuable.) -- 89.101.221.42 ( talk) 23:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Seeing as you're around (I can't believe I'm still up), is it a civility issue if someone ignores you? People are being told that I'm not 'discussing' in the edit-notes of a guy reverting me - but I have discussed my edits in Talk, and with him too, on his talk page - but he simply won't reply or acknowledge them. Obviously, it's over Ireland, but all the same.. The article is there to edit so I am entitled to edit it. I only doing sensible stuff too. When it comes to genuine editing I think civility should count for something. -- Matt Lewis ( talk) 05:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
An RfC on the recent multi-page move has been opened at Talk:Ireland#RfC: controversial multi-page move. -- 89.101.221.42 ( talk) 10:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Rock, now that Deacon has made wheel-warring acceptable again you might unblock Matt Lewis. He was blocked by Ben Bell for being uncivil to...Ben Bell. Which is against the rules at least as much as wheel-warring. Actually, maybe you might toss in a punitive block of both Deacon and Ben while you are at it. At least, unlike Matt (IMHO), they'd deserve it. Sarah777 ( talk) 21:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello Excirial. I just wanted to let you know that on review I declined the speedy deletion on this article, and edited it down to a stub to address the WP:SPAM issue. I think he is borderline notable in the nutrition world, but if no 3rd party sources are provided soon to establish notability, I may AfD it myself. I'll give the creating editor a few days, though, as they are clearly new to Wikipedia. Rockpocke t 00:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
You may be interested in an all-encompassing compromise proposal tabled in respect of the Ireland naming dispute at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(Ireland-related_articles)/Ireland_disambiguation_task_force#Appeal_for_an_all-encompassing_solution Mooretwin ( talk) 13:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, Rock, for attempting to deal with that editor. I found him to be irrational, hence my decision to simply ignore him and go ahead with editing the article. I will freely admit that I make errors, and that my stubbornness can lead me to make questionable decisions, but, in this case, I believe I am correct. At any rate, thanks again for the attempt. Cheers! --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 01:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
This article has been created 3 times in the last hour or so and deleted twice just waiting on the third deletion could you block the recreation of this article thanks. BigDunc Talk 22:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Hiya Rock. That's why I can't see a 'merge proposal' passing at Ireland & Republic of Ireland articles. GoodDay ( talk) 22:31, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
What's the chances, of the republic changing its name to Southern Ireland (in the real world) & thus ending the 'naming disputes on Wikipedia? GoodDay ( talk) 23:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel ( talk) 03:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
In a similar vein to Special Category Status, you may be interested in these RMs:
Mooretwin ( talk) 01:54, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Rockpocket. Haven't seen you around much lately, so I hope life is treating you well. I trust your journey Down Under earlier this year was enjoyable. Anyway, Happy Holidays and hope to see more of your excellent contribs on the Ref Desk in the New Year. -- JackofOz ( talk) 07:28, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Titch Tucker is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas and a
Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Have a great holiday, and an eventful new year!
...you can delete it from my sandbox now. Cahoney1 ( talk) 22:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Not likely. I've peeked at the 'edit warring' on the RfA page & I'm certain; had I'd been an Arbitrator or Administrator, I'd have been booted out long ago. I think my block finger would've been too heavy. GoodDay ( talk) 00:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I see the RM was closed while I was banned - doesn't seem very fair. O Fenian failed to provide the primary source, yet it was found in his favour - backed up by Domer48 amd Big Dunc - editors with a history of personal conflict against me. That's Wikipedia. Happy Christmas, anyway. Mooretwin ( talk) 18:36, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for making 2008 an interesting and enlightening year for me; at some point, our paths have crossed and I've found your comments amusing, helpful or thought-provoking—I'll let you guess which!
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
Rock, please read Tznkai's babble here. This c**p is surreal. Sarah777 ( talk) 03:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Rock I went onto my View and edit watchlist and one of the articles watchlisted is now ,,H,A,G,G,Ĕ,R ? (Talk)I don't know which article it used to be any ideas. -- Domer48 'fenian' 21:51, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Is there a contrabutions for ,,H,A,G,G,Ĕ,R ? -- Domer48 'fenian' 22:52, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
The Manifest Integrity Barnstar | ||
For calmness in the madhouse Sarah777 ( talk) 10:25, 1 November 2008 (UTC) |
I know I've been "on your case" a bit recently - so just to let you know my opinion of your integrity isn't diminished though I reserve the right to question your judgment betimes (and only betimes) ;) Sarah777 ( talk) 10:25, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Rock, some tag-team warring here? Clearly the Mooretwin change was of a type that requires prior discussion? (Also the 'reference' given appears to be a dud). Sarah777 ( talk) 12:57, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
You have breeched your 0RR rule on the Article, in addition to the 1RR on the USC. I suggest you stop please. -- Domer48 'fenian' 15:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I did not issue the sanctions, ask SirFozzie he placed you on it. But I do think 0RR means 0RR. -- Domer48 'fenian' 15:41, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message as you took part is a past move request at Flag of Ireland . This message is to inform you that their a new move has been requested GnevinAWB ( talk) 23:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I hadn't gotten to it, I was still waiting on information on possible harassment related to VK that I never received information on when the issue was archived. I'm a bit busy at the moment, I just happened to log in just now for a quick check on the cases I'm clerking, but I'll try to get to it tonight.-- Tznkai ( talk) 19:28, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I just saw your note on my Talk page. I had not looked at the page since May 2008, having abandoned Wikipedia and its "open-source" format to the ill-informed masses. I will, however, have a look at the site you recommended. PhD Historian ( talk) 19:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, You have gone OTT with your revisions to the above articles. Other than one or two "citations needed", there was no need to remove so much of the text that was compiled with great care and without prejudice to either side in the conflict in Northern Ireland (I hope). I would propose to restore some of this unless you want take it to talk. For instance, the section about Murphy wanting to muddy the waters regarding identification as a way of causing doubt in the minds of jurors is fact, referred to in the citation at the end of the next paragraph. If it helps, I'll combine the two in one. And the death of Shaw has been toned down far too much to convey the brutality and viciousness of the killers. Regards, Billsmith60 ( talk) 18:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC). And why remove the cut-throat murders for which the Shankill Butchers are infamous? They are indeed killings but more than the average sectarian murder. Billsmith60 ( talk) 18:55, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
"With his knowledge of police procedure, garnered though attending trials at Belfast Crown Court, it is likely that Murphy was trying to "muddy the waters" as regards identification."
"That decision was to have deadly consequences for many innocent people at a later date"
No offense, but that line would be clichéd in a tabloid report. Its not our job to generate drama using hindsight, we just report what happened when it happened and let the readers draw their own conclusions. I'm happy to discuss examples further on the talk page if you like. Rockpocke t 21:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Wowsers, Wikipiere is stubborn. Phew, thank goodness for Checkusers. GoodDay ( talk) 18:29, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
About 40 of those are not mine. 213.202.149.149 ( talk) 22:47, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
About Mooretwin. Can you sort out these edits by him? http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Amhr%C3%A1n_na_bhFiann&diff=251578896&oldid=251576989 http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=United_Kingdom_of_Great_Britain_and_Ireland&diff=251649432&oldid=251648581 78.16.174.172 ( talk) 11:04, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that Rock, it looked like it was going to hell in a basket. -- Domer48 'fenian' 18:59, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Yet again?-- Domer48 'fenian' 21:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Could you please tone down the semi-protect you put on the Joel McHale article? Three months of semi for four cases of weak BLP violations over one week is excessive and completely against the spirit of Wikipedia. Only a highly contentious article should be granted a semi of that length. Thanks. Ip208man ( talk) 06:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello Rockpocket. Do you remember you said I could come to you if I needed any help? Well, this might not be the kind of help you were referring to. The thing is, I created two tables at the Partick Thistle FC article. One with the top ten appearances which is now complete. The other is the top ten goalscorers. I have completed almost all of the table barring a few of the players career spans. It is now starting to drive me nuts, I seem to be spending forever looking up websites for the information without any luck. I notice from your user page you have edited football articles, which is another reason I have come to you. Now, here's the cheeky bit, HELP! Any help or advice would be very gratefully received and perhaps prevent this user from being taken to the funny farm. I understand you are probably very busy elsewhere so would understand if you did not have the time. Thanks. Titch Tucker ( talk) 07:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Rock, Would you move this page to "Roscommon" please? Some chappie moved it to "Roscommon (town)" - contrary to agreed style. But I couldn't move it back. Extremely irritating that. So I moved it to "Ros Comáin" as a temporary measure. Apparently you need to be an Admin, (for some reason that escapes me) to move a page back to its original name. Sarah777 ( talk) 20:50, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Rock, please see this. Matt Lewis has called me, and/or has implied that I am "right-wing", "racist", "xenophobic" and "hate-centered". Now Rock - this is way beyond the pale. If myself, or any of the other Nationalist Irish editors on a NI article had said anything like that blocks would follow without hesitation. I am reading things into the silence of at least half-a-dozen Admins on whose watch-list I know am - but will resist the temptation to cut loose at The Cabal just now! Sarah777 ( talk) 13:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately you just looked at the one thread, and what you said isn't going to effect anything - not least Sarah leafleting Wikipedia with inflammatory politics. It's not 50/50 thing at all. Whatever I personally say to her wbout how I feel about it, I just deliberately get more of the same, and the deal on Wikpedia seems to be that I (and others) are supposed to just 'put up and shut up'. No and no again, and that kind of privilege sticks in my gullet.
I'm only in this particular talk page because Sarah came here - I'll put this to the 'Troubles' page later on. I know the routes I'm taking, and I stand by what I said at Northern Ireland talk. Although I would have been better simply filing a report, I'm not having my response 'cancelling out' her xenophobia (the word I used - and how can you say it's worse? It is my entire point) - and she knows full well how provocative she is being. My response to her is simply a separate issue. I've actually been extremely tolerant with Sarah on a number occasions, though I more often make the mistake of trying to address her. I've never set out to provoke or offend anyone - and politically, my comments and edits are well within in the rules (and I am including the above in this case). I actual make useful edits on a number of topics, and I am basically a 'benefit' to Wikipedia - so why should I have to read this?
The cancelling-out trick of 'Civility' may well often work in Sarah's favour on this matter, but I'll more than happily accept a block for what I said, if the end result actually meant someone had the courage to deal with her properly. I'd take a long block too, if it would result in cutting out Sarah's anti-British jibes from Wikipedia as well - and I'm not joking one bit. Her intention is to ruffle feathers and offend. Who the hell gave her that remit? It's not just about me - its the effect it has on others too. I just don't want to see it any more - it's never help her own causes, the project certainly, or anything positive I can think of at all. The Ireland naming issue was in a complete hole for a long time with the stupid "British POV" accusation, and it was largely kept there by her casual uncensored comments. It all just creates an atmosphere passers-by walk out of as soon as they walk in. Why do you think so many Irish pages are dominated by same bloody people? Why so many Irish pages are in a mess - I've even done basic edits on some myself, and I have no real interest in doing that at Ireland. At British Isles it can get even worse - with people admitting they don't go there. I didn't ask you to say anything to her personally (or have anything against you personally), but what you said to her above was about as weak as it gets regarding Sarah, and is effectively saying "move on" - but reading again you are not being an admin here, and without doubt I am going to take this on. -- Matt Lewis ( talk) 09:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
People spent hours putting the UKCOUNTRYREFS table together - I can't belive you both haven't seen it? It lists 36 reliable sources for all the Countries of the United Kingdom (where the table resides). I don't see what is different to NI than any other country settled in and made from another. It's hardly a unique occurrence in the world - and it's hardly recent in terms of being British, either. If the UK government (as the sovereign state) says it is a 'country', Wikipedia simply has to go by their word - so only one ref is really needed. I sometimes skirt around calling it a country in comments (use other sentence structures etc) to avoid the chance of distracting debate, but this will be an issue soon at the new country lists. It's much easier if can all agree on it, especially when nothing really is to be gained by disputing it (as with Wales, or anywhere). Anyway - having said that (to Rockpocket as much as Sarah), I'm out. -- Matt Lewis ( talk) 02:50, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Hiya Rock. I just read your "..don't give a sh-t.." comment there. Best chuckle I've had in a long time; Thanks. GoodDay ( talk) 22:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
There he was, behind the door
Eyes glazed
Fighting & screaming across the hall
He wasn't fazed
In his mind, behind the door
The world is great
Nothing ever bother him
As he's baked
But now & then
Without a warning
A loud noice occurs
The wind is blowing
With the passing of the breeze
He's suddenly awake
One couldn't blame, with such a stinch
He's no longer baked.
He could have been the love of her life
Though he looks like a farting junkie
He runs a men's hotel in Brighton town
But to Jeanne he'll always be hunky
Hiya Rock. I don't know how this one is gonna end, but it's sure entertaining. GoodDay ( talk) 00:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
We're not in agreement about everything, but you do appear to be making an honest effort at neutrality over articles relating to the history of Ireland. Any chance you could have a look at the Historical Accuracy section of the talk page for the film 'The Wind That Shakes The Barley'? I'm involved in a dispute over verifiability with another editor, who has asked a couple of buddies to "weigh in" on his behalf. Thanks Thoskit ( talk) 07:01, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. The section wasn't originally my addition - I just thought it worth keeping. Thoskit ( talk) 20:22, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Rock, I hardly feel I deserve it, but it's much appreciated. Happy Thanksgiving to you. Truth be told, I thought you were Scottish, or are you Scottish American? Titch Tucker ( talk) 00:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
This IP is deleting my contributions at Talk:Ireland. This time Rock, I'd appreciate a bit less fence-sitting and a bit more action. If it reverts me again I want a block. Pronto. Tnx in advance. (I don't want/need a sermon on my beheaviour here Rock; OK? Sarah777 ( talk) 21:02, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
I didn't do anything, Sarah. I haven't been on-line all weekend. For future reference, the best way to deal with IPs !voting is to mark their comment with a {{ SPA}} and then ignore them. The closing admin will then give the comment the attention it is due (i.e. not very much). Oh, and another bit of advice: I welcome any editor asking for help with a problem, but I don't respond as well to demands. If you want something done "pronto" you might consider that in future.
Regarding the IPs that have been hassling you, Jeanne. There is a limitation to what we can do, technically, to stop editors from non-static IPs. I can semi-protect your page to stop IPs editing it, but that would stop all IPs, not just this one. If it continues, let me know and I will do that. I would just ignore the allegations on Dunc's page. He is wise enough to see if for what it is, and I expect he will either delete it himself, refute it or just ignore it. Rockpocke t 19:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
FYI Rocketpocket, you may want to take a deeper look in to why I removed Sarah777's comments. See here.
Also, you may also want to familiarise yourself with the distinction between an SPA and an IP-based contributor. Because of ISP technologies such as DHCP, IP-based contributors may not have a very long contribution history, or it may be mixed with the contibutions of other people, but IP-based contributions to polls are just as valid as contributions by any other editor. There are many reasons a person may not want to take an account with WP, but this is still the encyclopedia that "anyone can edit".
I was involved in a dispute over this before. The AN/I thread is here. Can you pay particular attention to comments such as:
One admin has already made a hasty decision tonight, the last thing we want is for another to spread misinformation. Thanks. -- 89.101.221.42 ( talk) 22:18, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
I think it is quite urgent - the longer something gets left for, the harder it is to reverse. The note I left on WP:AN is only for a review rather than a reversal. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 19:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Rockpocket, I imagine that tomorrow morning there will begin the flood of people confused at the move decision. Few will be actually aware of what happened, many may simply believe that consensus on the poll was for a move. Even if the do they won't know where to comment one way or the other: Ireland, Ireland (island), Ireland (state), Republic of Ireland, Ireland (disambiguation), the task force page, Tariqabjotu's talk page, or the AN/I??
I think it would be a good idea to set up an RFC on the decision and post notices of the RFC at each of the relevant pages. For one thing it will keep comments all in one place and allow us to gauge the measure of consensus - which may fall down on the side of 'it happened, leave it alone'. I don't think the RFC needs to be or should be controversially phrased, simple a statement of fact and a plain request for comment, but I think it would be useful as a means to calmly collect the response of community to the decision to move the articles.
As an anon, I do not have privileges to start the required RFC page, so I am asking if you would. (I am going to post a copy of this message on Tariqabjotu's, he may be interested in setting up the RFC himself. In any case his perspective on an RFC would be valuable.) -- 89.101.221.42 ( talk) 23:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Seeing as you're around (I can't believe I'm still up), is it a civility issue if someone ignores you? People are being told that I'm not 'discussing' in the edit-notes of a guy reverting me - but I have discussed my edits in Talk, and with him too, on his talk page - but he simply won't reply or acknowledge them. Obviously, it's over Ireland, but all the same.. The article is there to edit so I am entitled to edit it. I only doing sensible stuff too. When it comes to genuine editing I think civility should count for something. -- Matt Lewis ( talk) 05:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
An RfC on the recent multi-page move has been opened at Talk:Ireland#RfC: controversial multi-page move. -- 89.101.221.42 ( talk) 10:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Rock, now that Deacon has made wheel-warring acceptable again you might unblock Matt Lewis. He was blocked by Ben Bell for being uncivil to...Ben Bell. Which is against the rules at least as much as wheel-warring. Actually, maybe you might toss in a punitive block of both Deacon and Ben while you are at it. At least, unlike Matt (IMHO), they'd deserve it. Sarah777 ( talk) 21:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello Excirial. I just wanted to let you know that on review I declined the speedy deletion on this article, and edited it down to a stub to address the WP:SPAM issue. I think he is borderline notable in the nutrition world, but if no 3rd party sources are provided soon to establish notability, I may AfD it myself. I'll give the creating editor a few days, though, as they are clearly new to Wikipedia. Rockpocke t 00:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
You may be interested in an all-encompassing compromise proposal tabled in respect of the Ireland naming dispute at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(Ireland-related_articles)/Ireland_disambiguation_task_force#Appeal_for_an_all-encompassing_solution Mooretwin ( talk) 13:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, Rock, for attempting to deal with that editor. I found him to be irrational, hence my decision to simply ignore him and go ahead with editing the article. I will freely admit that I make errors, and that my stubbornness can lead me to make questionable decisions, but, in this case, I believe I am correct. At any rate, thanks again for the attempt. Cheers! --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 01:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
This article has been created 3 times in the last hour or so and deleted twice just waiting on the third deletion could you block the recreation of this article thanks. BigDunc Talk 22:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Hiya Rock. That's why I can't see a 'merge proposal' passing at Ireland & Republic of Ireland articles. GoodDay ( talk) 22:31, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
What's the chances, of the republic changing its name to Southern Ireland (in the real world) & thus ending the 'naming disputes on Wikipedia? GoodDay ( talk) 23:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel ( talk) 03:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
In a similar vein to Special Category Status, you may be interested in these RMs:
Mooretwin ( talk) 01:54, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Rockpocket. Haven't seen you around much lately, so I hope life is treating you well. I trust your journey Down Under earlier this year was enjoyable. Anyway, Happy Holidays and hope to see more of your excellent contribs on the Ref Desk in the New Year. -- JackofOz ( talk) 07:28, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Titch Tucker is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas and a
Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Have a great holiday, and an eventful new year!
...you can delete it from my sandbox now. Cahoney1 ( talk) 22:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Not likely. I've peeked at the 'edit warring' on the RfA page & I'm certain; had I'd been an Arbitrator or Administrator, I'd have been booted out long ago. I think my block finger would've been too heavy. GoodDay ( talk) 00:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I see the RM was closed while I was banned - doesn't seem very fair. O Fenian failed to provide the primary source, yet it was found in his favour - backed up by Domer48 amd Big Dunc - editors with a history of personal conflict against me. That's Wikipedia. Happy Christmas, anyway. Mooretwin ( talk) 18:36, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for making 2008 an interesting and enlightening year for me; at some point, our paths have crossed and I've found your comments amusing, helpful or thought-provoking—I'll let you guess which!