User talk:Spleodrach/Archive/Archive 004
 | This page 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. |
Irish constituency maps
Hey sorry just saw your message, will create the maps just now :) --Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 23:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:17, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Dublin categories
Hi Snappy
I notice that you commented at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland#Dublin_city_categories but that you have not so far commented at the subsequent CFD discussion, so I just thought I'd draw your attention to the fact that the CFD discussion is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 January 4#Dublin. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:21, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Irish Democratic Party
Message added 11:04, 14 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hi Snappy. I hope this goes some way towards addressing your concerns. Diffly (talk) 11:04, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Brian Cowen
Hi Snappy, You recently reveresed my edit on Brian Cowen in which I included his new acting position as Minister for Foreign Affairs (Ireland). I believe this is significant which is the reason why I included this. I am going to change it back but before I do so can you explain why you reversed it in the first instance? Thanks--Ciaran M (talk) 23:15, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
- As I explained in the edit summary, its not necessary to mention the acting position in the very first sentence. It's sufficient to mention it in the opening paragraph. Please do not edit war over this. The first sentence should only mention his main role, his other positions (TD, Leader of FF) are mentioned later. Rdgs, Snappy (talk) 23:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
- My point simply is that Cowen is currently holding a very significant office (MFFA) and whilst that is somewhat minor in comparison to his main role as Taoiseach if you view David Cameron you will see that more than just Prime Minister are included in 'the very first sentence'. I will of course not edit war over this but will instead raise the issue on the talkpage. Thanks--Ciaran M (talk) 23:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
- David Cameron's opening sentence reads very clunkily. I've re-worded the intro so it mentions he is acting MFFA, but mentions his assumption if this role later on in the opening para. I hope this compromise is acceptable. See also Hu Jintao for a different view. Snappy (talk) 23:54, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
- My point simply is that Cowen is currently holding a very significant office (MFFA) and whilst that is somewhat minor in comparison to his main role as Taoiseach if you view David Cameron you will see that more than just Prime Minister are included in 'the very first sentence'. I will of course not edit war over this but will instead raise the issue on the talkpage. Thanks--Ciaran M (talk) 23:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Vandalism
The table http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Current_Government_of_Ireland has been vandalised. I don't know how to edit those kinds of tables so I thought I'd alert you.JandK87 (talk) 14:22, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Extroit.
I have to admit, it was a new one for me also. I just copied it from Cork City Council. The bit about tier 1 was what attracted me. It defines what the council is before getting into the flowery stuff. Happy to substitute "serves" instead. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:15, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- I see than in a series of edits such as this one, Snappy has removed from the local authority articles the term "tier 1" and the word "jurisdiction". I had been looking into both of these, and AFAICS jurisdiction should be used to refers to courts and other processes of law, and not to administrative bodies such as councils. I don't know where the "tier 1" stuff came from, but since it was unsourced it didn't belong in the articles. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:31, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Jack Lynch
On 20 January 2011 I edited jack Lynch to reflect that Mr. Lynch was born in the United Kingdom; a fact which whether you like it or not was the truth. You then proceeded to revert my edit and referred to me as a "troll". Are you disputing that Southern Ireland was a wholly unitary part of the United Kingdom prior to 3 May 1921 and that Mr. Lynch was indeed born within the United Kingdom? I'd appreciate your insight on this!
-- 24.18.75.42 (talk) 16:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
IMOS wording
Please read WP:IMOS carefully before deleting referenced material from articles (e.g., this, et al.)
WP:IMOS: Naming people reads in part: "When giving the Irish version of the name of a person who is normally referred to by an English-language name, a source can only be considered reliable if it provides an Irish version explicitly for that individual. It is not acceptable to cite a generic English-Irish dictionary of names to translate the person's forenames or surnames and present this combination as the person's name in Irish. If someone did not use the Irish version of his or her name, it is not appropriate or encyclopaedic to "invent" such names, as this constitutes original research." (My emphasis).
If you'll note, all of the names you deleted were sourced to official website of the Oireachtas Éireann, a reliable source, and inclusion of such names is in full compliance with the IMOS guidelines. The source clearly provides the English and Irish names of the subjects as well as their titles and a photo of each so there is little likelihood of misconstruing the identity of the person in question. In short, these are not the "translations" or "inventions" that are the target of the IMOS guideline. — AjaxSmack 21:50, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- None of these people are known by their Irish name or use this version of it. I mean who has heard of Parthalán Ó hEachthair, and how come Trevor Sargent doesn't have one. Its OR by some civil servant. This issue needs to be discussed at Wikiproject Ireland, until then please stop adding these names. Furthermore, the text quoted applies to article name not translating the english name in the article. Snappy (talk) 22:00, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- I have heard of Parthalán Ó hEachthairn from TG4[1]. But I didn't know John Gormley's Irish name and when went to the Wikipedia article to find it, I was surprised it wasn't there, especially since he's in government. That is precisely what an encyclopedia is for: to provide information that I don't know. The addition of referenced material to an article that is relevant to the subject (the Irish name of a member of a government in the "national language" of Ireland) and compliant with the related guidelines is hardly controversial. The guideline does refer to article test when it says: "If the Irish version [of a personal name] does not enjoy widespread usage among English speakers then use the English version when naming the article. In [this] case, refer to the Irish version of the name in the first sentence of the article." (my emphasis) If you disagree and wish to discuss it at Wikiproject Ireland or if you have evidence the Oireachtas website is "OR by some civil servant", fine but please refrain from deleting material simply because you haven't heard of it. — AjaxSmack 22:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- A couple of asides on the same topic. Two things convince me prima facie that the Oireachtas names are not OR. One is that a noted Irish speaker, Trevor Sargent, doesn't have an Irish name listed as you note. If some civil servant were making these up, I can't imagine him skipping that one. The second are the four different spellings of the Irish form of Ahern for Bertie, Dermot, Michael, and Noel. Four different civil servants or just a liquid lunch? — AjaxSmack 22:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- You are misinterpreting the guideline at IMOS. Referencing the Irish version in the first sentence is for people like Geoffrey Keating who are known by both versions. Apart from Éamon Ó Cuív and Seán Ó Fearghaíl, none of these politicians use their so called Irish version of their name in the English language media. John Gormley doesn't have an Irish name, no mention of it on his website. Trevor Sargent doesn't use one either and he is a fluent Irish speaker. What you are doing is adding in a name that the person never uses and is never used in the English language media to refer to them. A persons name is either in English like Trevor Sargent or in Irish like Proinsias De Rossa, we don't add versions of names that the person would have in Irish, if they used them. If the person's name is in Irish then the article title will follow, otherwise its just the English name. Snappy (talk) 22:45, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- I didn't imply English media usage of the Irish names and that's not required by the passage "If the Irish version [of a personal name] does not enjoy widespread usage among English speakers then use the English version when naming the article. In [this] case, refer to the Irish version of the name in the first sentence of the article." (my emphasis) Nicolaus Copernicus never referred to himself as Mikołaj Kopernik; nor is he referred to as such in English sources but the name appears in the first line of the article since he is from what is now Poland. Providing a sourced Irish name of an Irish politician is hardly a stretch and it strikes me as something a reader might want to know. Do you have any affirmative reason for not wanting to include this information? — AjaxSmack 23:17, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, because they are made up! Not talking about people from Poland dead for 500 years. I'm talking about living Irish people, people with birth certs saying their English language name. Giving them an Irish version of their is OR, by you or by a civil servant. How can John Gormley have an Irish name when he never uses it and is never referred to by it? It is my contention that the naming section of IMOS be revisted and clarified. I will open a debate on WikiProject Ireland tomorrow, where I hope there will be a full and frank debate. Until then, I suggest that neither add or remove any Irish names from any articles. Snappy (talk) 23:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- I certainly didn't create these myself and you have as yet given no evidence that civil servants are responsible. Since they appear on numerous official Irish webpages I can assume that they are at least tolerated if not sanctioned. As far as birth certificates go, many people have notable names that are neither English nor on a birth certificate. Some are even still living such as Kevin Rudd, whose Chinese name, Lù Kèwén (陸克文) is considered noteworthy enough for inclusion in his Wikipedia article despite no reference mentioning that he uses this name himself. — AjaxSmack 00:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, because they are made up! Not talking about people from Poland dead for 500 years. I'm talking about living Irish people, people with birth certs saying their English language name. Giving them an Irish version of their is OR, by you or by a civil servant. How can John Gormley have an Irish name when he never uses it and is never referred to by it? It is my contention that the naming section of IMOS be revisted and clarified. I will open a debate on WikiProject Ireland tomorrow, where I hope there will be a full and frank debate. Until then, I suggest that neither add or remove any Irish names from any articles. Snappy (talk) 23:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- I didn't imply English media usage of the Irish names and that's not required by the passage "If the Irish version [of a personal name] does not enjoy widespread usage among English speakers then use the English version when naming the article. In [this] case, refer to the Irish version of the name in the first sentence of the article." (my emphasis) Nicolaus Copernicus never referred to himself as Mikołaj Kopernik; nor is he referred to as such in English sources but the name appears in the first line of the article since he is from what is now Poland. Providing a sourced Irish name of an Irish politician is hardly a stretch and it strikes me as something a reader might want to know. Do you have any affirmative reason for not wanting to include this information? — AjaxSmack 23:17, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- You are misinterpreting the guideline at IMOS. Referencing the Irish version in the first sentence is for people like Geoffrey Keating who are known by both versions. Apart from Éamon Ó Cuív and Seán Ó Fearghaíl, none of these politicians use their so called Irish version of their name in the English language media. John Gormley doesn't have an Irish name, no mention of it on his website. Trevor Sargent doesn't use one either and he is a fluent Irish speaker. What you are doing is adding in a name that the person never uses and is never used in the English language media to refer to them. A persons name is either in English like Trevor Sargent or in Irish like Proinsias De Rossa, we don't add versions of names that the person would have in Irish, if they used them. If the person's name is in Irish then the article title will follow, otherwise its just the English name. Snappy (talk) 22:45, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- A couple of asides on the same topic. Two things convince me prima facie that the Oireachtas names are not OR. One is that a noted Irish speaker, Trevor Sargent, doesn't have an Irish name listed as you note. If some civil servant were making these up, I can't imagine him skipping that one. The second are the four different spellings of the Irish form of Ahern for Bertie, Dermot, Michael, and Noel. Four different civil servants or just a liquid lunch? — AjaxSmack 22:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- I have heard of Parthalán Ó hEachthairn from TG4[1]. But I didn't know John Gormley's Irish name and when went to the Wikipedia article to find it, I was surprised it wasn't there, especially since he's in government. That is precisely what an encyclopedia is for: to provide information that I don't know. The addition of referenced material to an article that is relevant to the subject (the Irish name of a member of a government in the "national language" of Ireland) and compliant with the related guidelines is hardly controversial. The guideline does refer to article test when it says: "If the Irish version [of a personal name] does not enjoy widespread usage among English speakers then use the English version when naming the article. In [this] case, refer to the Irish version of the name in the first sentence of the article." (my emphasis) If you disagree and wish to discuss it at Wikiproject Ireland or if you have evidence the Oireachtas website is "OR by some civil servant", fine but please refrain from deleting material simply because you haven't heard of it. — AjaxSmack 22:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Sign
You might want to sign this, just for the record. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 01:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
ULA Candidates and that Joan Burton Interview
Just two queries. Firstly regarding the ULA candidates in the general election, should they be listed as members of the ULA for the sake of simplicity or should they be listed by their party affiliation (e.g. SP and PbP) as ElectionsIreland are doing. Also I think that Joan Burton interview on Tonight with Vincent Browne should be mentioned on her article. Its generating a lot of comment and her claim that Vincent Browne is sexist is probably going to make the incident more notorious. Exiledone (talk) 15:02, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- Regarding the ULA candidates, I think that they should be listed as ULA for party affiliation purposes but since AFAIK, the party name (SP, PBP, WUAG) appears on the ballot paper then perhaps a footnote is needed, in order to let the reader know the candidates party. As for the Joan Burton interview, I haven't seen it, but you're right it is getting alot of comment, someone mentioned it to me today, so off to youtube it now. It may deserve a mention (that is a line or two), but sometimes these things get undue weight in a short article, so that's sometime to watch out for. Snappy (talk) 20:32, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- Just to let you know it's car crash television stuff. It's hilarious but at the same time I actually felt sorry for her for making herself look like a tool. I just thought I'd bring it up because some edits on her page which mentioned the incident were reverted. Also she's after claiming in the daily mail that Vincent Browne was acting sexist towards her which is probably not going to help her. Exiledone (talk) 22:21, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- I just watched it, and to be honest I found it rather boring! Yes, she makes an ass of herself but I thought it would be in a more screaming, ranting, loony way. Vincent Brown may not be sexist but he is a tit as well! Can't honestly see what the fuss is about, it fails the Reeling in the years test, will probably be forgotten about in a few weeks, hopefully the ge campaign will provide more interesting moments than this. Snappy (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- It's done massive damage to her credibility and this women is being tipped by some to be our next minister of finance. In addition to constantly interrupting Higgins and Coveney she basically lied about Eamon Gilmore's appearance on the Late Late Show where he said he wouldn't reverse any cuts. Don't think VB was a tit; he did point out that Burton and Higgins were running in the same constituency which probably was a reason of sorts. Would a few lines suffice on her article or would it be better to wait and see. Exiledone (talk) 22:48, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'd wait and see, unless we're going to mention every politician who does a 'turn' on VB, e.g. Conor Lenihan, whose rant was more over the top than Burton's and funnier as well! Its hard to tell if she lied, she was waffling like all politicians but Vinnie interrupting her so often, its difficult to say. Btw, Joan's chances of being next Finance Minister very slim before this incident, now they are zero! Snappy (talk) 23:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- It's done massive damage to her credibility and this women is being tipped by some to be our next minister of finance. In addition to constantly interrupting Higgins and Coveney she basically lied about Eamon Gilmore's appearance on the Late Late Show where he said he wouldn't reverse any cuts. Don't think VB was a tit; he did point out that Burton and Higgins were running in the same constituency which probably was a reason of sorts. Would a few lines suffice on her article or would it be better to wait and see. Exiledone (talk) 22:48, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- I just watched it, and to be honest I found it rather boring! Yes, she makes an ass of herself but I thought it would be in a more screaming, ranting, loony way. Vincent Brown may not be sexist but he is a tit as well! Can't honestly see what the fuss is about, it fails the Reeling in the years test, will probably be forgotten about in a few weeks, hopefully the ge campaign will provide more interesting moments than this. Snappy (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- Just to let you know it's car crash television stuff. It's hilarious but at the same time I actually felt sorry for her for making herself look like a tool. I just thought I'd bring it up because some edits on her page which mentioned the incident were reverted. Also she's after claiming in the daily mail that Vincent Browne was acting sexist towards her which is probably not going to help her. Exiledone (talk) 22:21, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Magherintemple
You're not in the least bit petty referring to Magherintemple as an insignificant place? As far as overly detailed is that not the point of an encyclopedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by An Cúl Ghear (talk • contribs) 23:52, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
- Am I not? Thanks! As for overly detailed see WP:ARTICLE. Snappy (talk) 18:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Article blanking
I've reverted your blanking of the article List of Sinn Féin MPs. If you would like to propose moving or deleting the article, please do that, not blanking it and its talk page. Warofdreams talk 09:55, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Ballot order
Why not ballot order? Why alphabetical by party? -- Evertype·✆ 12:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- It's easier to follow when grouped by party. Snappy (talk) 19:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- I registered so I could comment on my changes you reversed. I can see where you're coming from, someone can see who the candidates from a given party one after the other. But I'd have a few comments.
- First, Wikipedia should reflect the electoral system. Given we list them alphabetically by name on the ballot in Ireland, that seems the best way to order them here. In Malta, they split them by party on the ballot in elections using STV. It would seem to make some sense in that case to list them by party. Here, every candidate is simply a candidates from the point of view of the electoral system.
- It doesn't take up that much space in any given constituency, people can still see them in one short list. It's not as if they have to scroll up and down.
- It's nice to give people a preview of what their ballot will look like.
- I'm suspicious of an order that starts with Fianna Fáil candidates and finishes with the United Left Alliance, and then lists Independents. Not that I'm ascribing a political motive, but listing them alphabetically by name can encourage those reading the page to read through the list, rather than looking for a specific party. It's what alphabetical listing does in general psychologically. I know it is alphabetically by party, but as I say, that does leave you with an order FF, FG, Green, Lab, SF, ULA that at first glance mistook for being based on current party size. In Ireland's case, it does look biased. --IrishPolitico (talk) 17:26, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- I see your point. If you want to change them to sorted alphabetically then I don't object any more. Snappy (talk) 19:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Cool. Thanks for appreciating. Will catch you around these pages over the next few weeks! --IrishPolitico (talk) 21:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- I registered so I could comment on my changes you reversed. I can see where you're coming from, someone can see who the candidates from a given party one after the other. But I'd have a few comments.
Hi! I left a question for you on this AfD. I was confused by your comment. I explained what has me confused there. Thanks!--v/r - TP 13:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Irish Democratic Party AfD
I've updated the AfD to reflect the IDP's statement that they won't be contesting the election. Thanks for the "wait and see" approach. Feel free to go ahead with whatever you and Lozleader think is the best resolution. Diffly (talk) 22:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Adebari
I see you have improved my piece on Mr. Rotimi Adebari. Well done. Though I feel that an image would be most appropriate to go along with this. Please insert his image. He is soon to be the 1st African to be elected to the Dail and you hav'nt even given him a photo! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onomxam (talk • contribs) 00:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- If you have a free non copyrighted image of the subject, then upload it to wikimedia commons. I have no idea what his chances of election are, but there are plenty of TDs without photos, so its no big deal. Snappy (talk) 09:44, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Taoisigh
I agree that GD's application of ordinals was doubtful and considered reverting them myself. I wasn't aware that this was the cause of previous debate. Can you direct me to the previous discussion? Best. RashersTierney (talk) 11:58, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- The original discussion was here. If User:GoodDay feels that ordinals should be included then he should start a new discussion to see if the consensus has changed. Snappy (talk) 13:13, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
TD - no TDs exist on dissolution
Designation of TD in a dissolved Dail.
I quoted the Constitution to verify my thesis. You asked for verification, I provided it. There are only two editors discussing this. You ask for no reversion during discussion, but this is ignoring the reality and the citation I provided.
There can't be a Member of the Dail (TD) when there is no Dail in existence. Basic fact not opinion. Please indicate why I should not now remove your recent reversion. Tayana (talk) 00:47, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'm copying this to Brian Cowen talk page so this discussion can be kept in one place, and will reply there. Snappy (talk) 00:58, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
TD designation
I find your assertions to be disruptive WP:DIS and a sad reflection of your inability to address the issue of when a TD ceases to be a TD. It is not trivial to be precise in description, as you accuse me of in my editing, indeed it is a cornerstone of encyclopedic editing to be factually correct. Why not devote your energy to editing factually and not engage in disparaging another editor, myself and talk as you did on the Cowen talk page. Your comments breach [[WP::PA]] guidelines and you are engaging in disrupting editing WP:DIS in that you are not improving the topic. Tayana (talk) 03:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
February 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ceann Comhairle. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
- Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
- Editors violating the rule will usually be blocked for 24 hours for a first incident.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:20, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Also, per WP:BLANKING, don't mess with the IP's talkpage. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:22, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Excuse me, I was trying to revert an vandal who was removing factually accurate and cited material from the Ceann Comhairle article. What do you suggest I do? In fairness I admit that I should not touched the vandals talkpage and won't touch it again. Snappy (talk) 18:25, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- "Factually accurate and cited" doesn't always mean "encyclopedic". I haven't really looked at the content, but the first step in WP:Dispute resolution is to talk. Try getting consensus for the change on Talk:Ceann Comhairle first. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:28, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- So you're suggesting that when an IP (one you personally have blocked before) removes material which is both accurate and cited (albeit clumsily worded), that I should discuss this with them first. What a novel approach! Snappy (talk) 18:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Umm... basically, yes. Why is this a surprise, considering the amount of time you've been editing here? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- So you're suggesting that when an IP (one you personally have blocked before) removes material which is both accurate and cited (albeit clumsily worded), that I should discuss this with them first. What a novel approach! Snappy (talk) 18:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- "Factually accurate and cited" doesn't always mean "encyclopedic". I haven't really looked at the content, but the first step in WP:Dispute resolution is to talk. Try getting consensus for the change on Talk:Ceann Comhairle first. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:28, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Excuse me, I was trying to revert an vandal who was removing factually accurate and cited material from the Ceann Comhairle article. What do you suggest I do? In fairness I admit that I should not touched the vandals talkpage and won't touch it again. Snappy (talk) 18:25, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Apology
sorry about dat ciaran98 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ciaran98 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
South Dublin County Council
I created a starter article for South Dublin County Council. — O'Dea (talk) 20:13, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Dublin South East (Dáil Éireann constituency)
You deleted the link to candidate Hugh Sheehy saying "already has 2 references, doesn't need a 3rd promotional one" However there are no pages for Hugh Sheehy and no other link or reference on the page. Can you tell me why the reference was removed when other candidates have reference links?
candidate = Hugh Sheehy[1] |party = Independent (politician)
- As I already said in my comment the section has "already has 2 references, doesn't need a 3rd promotional one", both refs mention all candidates including Sheehy, therefore the link you added is solely for promotional and/or vanity purposes, therefore I removed per WP:Link, WP:Linkspam and WP:LINKSTOAVOID - "Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam.". Also, given you yout edit history, you probably have a relationship with Sheehy or his campaign, so you should also read WP:COI. Snappy (talk) 19:50, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Then why does ^ "Peadar Ó Ceallaigh". Fís Nua. http://fisnua.com/?page_id=820. Retrieved 14 February 2011. remain unedited and undeleted, which is what I meant by other candidates?
Deletion review for David Kenny
An editor has asked for a deletion review of David Kenny. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. v/r - TP 21:34, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Tom Kelleher (Councillor) article for deletion
I feel the article is relevant as it meets point 1 of WP:Politician. I also feel it is his nomination for election that makes it notable. I can point to several other articles with similar subjects that are currently on wikipedia such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mick_Barry_(Irish_Socialist_Party), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._J._Power and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clare_Daly.
Your comment states 'Article appears to be created to promote his candidacy in forthcoming Irish general election'
Please provide examples from the article of efforts to promote his candidacy. Thank you
Gerry Adams
You might be interested in the controversies in Adams' article in the past 3 days.
O Fenian's semi-protect action on the Gerry Adams article was not necessary. She could have called for a broader debate. The WP:BLP guideline makes clear that whilst a wiki-article must not engage in libel, it is appropriate to include publicised allegations of a public figure, quoting source (in this case the Evening Herald) and abiding by NPOV. Her "O Fenian" identity only adds grist to the mill in observing of her that her intervention to semi-protect the Gerry Adams article can only be understood as a clear political manipulation of his biography consistent with Irish hard-line republican (i.e. IRA) sympathisers. I regret that I am not using my wiki-identity on this article, precisely out of fear of IRA retribution for reporting controversy on the credibility of their "hero", Gerry Adams, but Ms. O Fenian would have been wiser to let the inclusion stand, modified as it has been subsequently by other editors to trim it down and balance it with Adams' own rebuttal of the allegations. Instead she seem to be protecting him which now renders the article biased. My sympathy to you for your efforts, and to all the victims of extremist atrocities 86.42.95.31 (talk) 02:23, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Raymond Whitehead
sorry about that [2] incorrectly, says Dun Laoghaire ClemMcGann (talk) 08:56, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello Snappy. I did this as a non-controversial move request. There are still some double redirects. I heard there was a bot that fixes them. If not, let me know and I'll work on it further. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 01:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Aengus Ó Snodaigh
You have ignored my comments on what I have removed from the article and insisted on reverting it without discussion. Please discuss it as it appears to add nothing to the article except as an attempted smear (from only one source). IRWolfie- (talk) 00:30, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Irish election results
Just wanted to note some appreciation for your work in adding more historic results to the articles on Dáil constituencies. It's great to see the improvements! Warofdreams talk 11:16, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- ditto ClemMcGann (talk) 13:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, nice to hear that! Snappy (talk) 19:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- u r doing a great job with the results - my compliments ClemMcGann (talk) 16:38, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, nice to hear that! Snappy (talk) 19:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- ditto ClemMcGann (talk) 13:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
When speaking English.
Are you defining a new Wiki standard for the definition of English? Is this a variant of WP:Common? Has the OED been informed? Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:50, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
- "Pat Brown is a Labour Party TD." Are you incapable of understanding this simple English sentence? Snappy (talk) 16:28, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Eamon Gilmore
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Eamon Gilmore. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
- Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
- Editors violating the rule will usually be blocked for 24 hours for a first incident.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
Please desist or you will be reported. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jolene22 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- Hilarious, a vandal/edit warrior is going to report me. Go ahead! I think you'll find by drawing attention to yourself, you will get banned! Snappy (talk) 00:53, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Current TDs
Hi Snappy. Fascinating election, what? I see you have stripped first names from the {{Template:Current TDs}}. Do you mind if I restore them? Here's why: 1. A good many new and unfamiliar names have been elected (hooray) and having the first names helps someone to identify them in the template. 2. The template defaults to collapsed mode, and does not occupy a big footprint. 3. We are fortunate that we don't need to save space; thrift is not a motivation here. 4. Having a full name is simply more reader-friendly. — O'Dea (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, fascinating indeed. I disagree about the first names because I think its more readable without. Do you want to start a discussion on the template talk page to get more opinions? I'll go with the consensus. Snappy (talk) 16:38, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- Well done for all your election coverage.Red Hurley (talk) 19:24, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! Snappy (talk) 21:58, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- Sadly for me I was focused on Laois–Offaly and Wicklow, which are both recounting....Red Hurley (talk) 08:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! Snappy (talk) 21:58, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Irish general election 2011
Please see this edit and my response to it -Rrius (talk) 02:40, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- I've edited the article to make it clear that 165 seats are contested and that 1 seat (the Ceann Comhairle) is automatically returned. Stating that 166 TDs are elected is factually inaccurate. So I am simply trying to get the facts clear in the article. Snappy (talk) 02:44, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- All 166 TDs were elected. One was elected without having to face a vote, as happens when only one candidate stands. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- How one is elected without an election taking place is beyond me, but if you say so! Snappy (talk) 22:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- By that logic the Irish general election, 1921 in Southern Ireland was not an election, and most Irish presidential elections were not elections.
- It'll be the same when you stand for the presidency. You will be so popular that nobody will want to stand against you, because they would obviously receive no votes ... so you will be elected without a vote. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- How one is elected without an election taking place is beyond me, but if you say so! Snappy (talk) 22:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- All 166 TDs were elected. One was elected without having to face a vote, as happens when only one candidate stands. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Website URLs in infobox
Hi Snappy
I have partially reverted this edit to Stephen Donnelly, in which you used {{Official website}} to hide the URL of his website. I can see no benefit in doing this, and hiding the URL simply deprives the reader of info, so I have restore display of the URL.
I am doing this for any other such uses I find. {{Official website}} is useful in the list of external links, but in an infobox it removes info. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:18, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Well, if you want to, go ahead, but you should use {{URL}} instead then in the infobox. If the person has a nice neat url like johnjones.com, that fine and readable but sometimes the url can be long and horrible like www.somecrappyblogsite.sillyname.johnjoneswebsite.co.uk but I've no problem with removing official website template. Snappy (talk) 22:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- OK, will use {{URL}}. I'll do an AWB run later. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:30, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Deletion
Someone created the Ruth Coppinger article again despite the individual in question being not notable hence the article being deleted a good while back. I'm unable to place this on the AfD log page without the archived discussion coming up on the log. Exiledone (talk) 00:22, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- She's Joe Higgins substitute for the European Parliament, so is automatically notable now Snappy (talk) 18:24, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- We are discussing the source of the story at Talk:Ruth Coppinger.Red Hurley (talk) 23:24, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Allocation of seats in the chamber for the 31st Dáil
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I will build and upload a more accurate version of my Dáil seating diagram which will show exactly who sits in which numbered seat in the chamber as soon after 9 March as the seating is arranged and codified. This diagram, while still schematic, will be a more correct and informative picture of the distribution of personnel in the chamber. — O'Dea (talk) 20:01, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Will you really? Well, any editor can do it but... if you are then use my kwebuko-derived image rather than the one you did, because no offence, but to be frank it looks brutal. Snappy (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Brutal? Since it resembles the actual Dáil more precisely than the kwebuko-derived image, responsibility for perceived brutality must be laid at the feet of those who designed the chamber. Snappy, when you decide to tell someone his work is "brutal" (a subjective term), first of all, it is not the sort of civility that is expected of Wikipedians; is it directly insulting (how can you pretend it is not?); and secondly, it is not convincing to append "no offence". I ask you, please, to be more civil and less insulting. — O'Dea (talk) 20:14, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- It's not uncivil or insulting to say that I don't like the look of the image you created. It's just honest, that's my opinion. I have not insulted you or being uncivil towards you. There is a distinction, and you should remember that. If you said to me that my kwebuko-derived image was a piece of crap, then I would accept that no bother, because I know you talking about the image and not the creator. Snappy (talk) 20:20, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Brutal? Since it resembles the actual Dáil more precisely than the kwebuko-derived image, responsibility for perceived brutality must be laid at the feet of those who designed the chamber. Snappy, when you decide to tell someone his work is "brutal" (a subjective term), first of all, it is not the sort of civility that is expected of Wikipedians; is it directly insulting (how can you pretend it is not?); and secondly, it is not convincing to append "no offence". I ask you, please, to be more civil and less insulting. — O'Dea (talk) 20:14, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- If you tell someone bluntly that he did something crap or brutal, it is of course an insult because you judge the work that comes from that person; it does not exist in some Platonic space entirely unconnected from him; you say indirectly that his graphic skill or aesthetic judgement is deficient. Those are undeniably personal comments, so "nothing personal" is inapplicable.
- There is another difficulty with your waspishness: you repeatedly issue commands as though you had the authority to do so: 1. "use my kwebuko-derived image rather than the one you did". 2. "There is a distinction, and you should remember that."
- These direct commands sound arrogant whether you realise it or not, and contribute to your uncivil and, again, waspish tone. You can make points by requests or suggestions, but to hand down lofty edicts is unacceptable. Once again, I ask you, please, to be more civil and less insulting. — O'Dea (talk) 20:33, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Lofty edicts, is it? Hello Mr. Pot, have you met Ms. Kettle! Almost immediately after I uploaded a new Dáil seating image, you left the following on my talk page - "I will build and upload a more accurate version of my Dáil seating diagram...". Nothing to say that you are working on something similar and that maybe we should work together on the subject, just a "lofty edict" in an arrogant and condescending tone, informing me that you will upload a better version of the seating plan.
- These direct commands sound arrogant whether you realise it or not, and contribute to your uncivil and, again, waspish tone. You can make points by requests or suggestions, but to hand down lofty edicts is unacceptable. Once again, I ask you, please, to be more civil and less insulting. — O'Dea (talk) 20:33, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- When I replied to say that imho your image looked brutal (constructive but honest criticism), you take it personally and get all huffy and accuse me of being incivil, waspish and issuing commands. My tone may be sometimes abrupt but it is always civil. Furthermore since we're on the subject, I don't care for your tone either, I find it petulant and whiney. You appear to be overly sensitive and look for insult where there is none. If you have any further issues with my "waspish tone", my "lofty edicts" or my "issuing of commands", then report me to ANI. Snappy (talk) 20:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- How can you complain when I say I am working on a more accurate version of the seating arrangements when you already saw my work earlier today and simply overwrote it with a less accurate version without discussion, or to suggest collaboration, yourself?
- Also, the thing about the phrase "no offense" is that it is a weasel term used by someone knowingly conveying an insult while being unwilling to admit his behaviour. If someone is not about to insult and offend someone, he would not say "no offense" because it would be unnecessary. Since you like to be "brutally honest" I will say I find someone saying "no offense" after insulting someone to be cowardly because he hides his actions behind that phrase.
- You might enjoy the views of others to make a change from listening to me. Here are some of the first entries defining "no offense" by different people in the Urban Dictionary:
- 1. A phrase used to make insults seem socially acceptable.
- 2. Something you say right before you offend the living shit out of someone.
- 3. Thing to say after you say something offensive.
- 4. You say "no offense" right before or after you say something that is insulting. "No offense" allows you to say just about anything you want about anyone.
- 5. The short line used after a very offensive and usually embarrassing statement which supposeably [sic] makes everything the 'sender' said socially acceptable.
- 6. People now use this to offend without repercussions.
- I will leave it at that. — O'Dea (talk) 21:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- I didn't overwrite your version, its a separate file but yes I did remove it from several articles. I used Kwebuko's version, so in a sense I was collaborating with him. Since I and Kwebuko prefer this version then you are in the minority. I didn't realise so a simple phrase like "no offence" would send someone into apoplexy, I should have just said "your image looks brutal". You also might want to learn how to differentiate between negative and constructive criticism. I intended my criticism to be constructive, you felt it was negative. It was not an Ad hominem attack on you. You should learn the difference. Snappy (talk) 21:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- I will leave it at that. — O'Dea (talk) 21:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Talkback error
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I think I may have deduced how I accidentally restored your Talkback template. I began to edit your talk page while the Talkback template was still in the page source code, and while I was doing so, you arrived and deleted the template. I then saved my comments. I am not certain, but I suspect that I did not receive an edit conflict message (following your edit) because of the nature of your edit, which was a simple text removal at the top of the page. Had you inserted text mixed up with mine at the bottom of the page, where I was typing, I would probably have had an edit conflict warning message. Alternatively, perhaps because I was only editing an isolated section at the bottom of the page, I did not come into conflict with you, but the thing was restored when I hit Save. I am not completely sure this makes sense, I am tired, and I don't know precisely how Wikipedia deals with such partly-concurrent editing activities in different zones in a page, but that's my attempt at understanding what happened. Your template did not interest me at all and I was not aware you had removed it. — O'Dea (talk) 01:30, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Ireland stuff
oh yeah, i knew a term like tht existed, was in fact surprised it didnt exist here ;)
- aklso check my additions for accuracy, they may be off on irish details
- ps- did you see the whooping of enghlad in the WC? I was there at the hotel that night. it was fun ;)Lihaas (talk) 09:13, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Arcade
Thanks snappy for tidying up the page, I wonder if you have any suggestion for the "multiple issues" tags on the page? Be patient with me please, I'm kinda new. I will try to expand this article when I can and may add some more pics of the market. Cheers J.--Doyler79 (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Dominic Hannigan
Thanks for finding his birth-month! However, please always add the source to the article itself, not the article history, where it cannot be found and doesn't belong. Thanks Hekerui (talk) 00:07, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Minister for various things
Eh damn! No I didn't know I had done anything wrong... I tried to move it the usual way but someone had stuck a redirect page at the location. It was a bit mad because it was redirecting from the current name to the old name. Life would be simpler if they didn't keep renaming govt departments... Lozleader (talk) 19:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, indeed it would! I've put in requests at WP:RM and as there are uncontroversial they should be moved quickly. Snappy (talk) 19:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- Any suggestions on the Justice/Defence dilemma? Is this a case of a 'new' ministry and the current articles are now 'historic', or has Defence been absorbed into Justice or vice versa or what? RashersTierney (talk) 21:27, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- I don't really know but there is limit of 15 govt. departments (inc. Taoiseach). Community, Equality and Gaeltacht has been split up with its components going to other depts. There is a new full senior Minister for Children, so thats another govt dept. Assuming that the new position of Public Expenditure and Reform is also going to be a full dept and not a part of Finance, then in order to keep to the limit Justice and Defence have to be merged rather than Shatter being a minister for two departments. Of course, I could be wrong. The picture should be clearer next week when more details on the re-org is published. Snappy (talk) 21:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- Guess you're right. Best to wait and see how things pan out. RashersTierney (talk) 21:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- I was wondering about the same thing re Justice etc. and Defence. I think they have to make an order (like this one [3] from 2010). Presumably it will appear in Iris Oifigúil next week? (Today's has a notice tha E Kenny has been elected taoiseach but nothing else about the new government) Lozleader (talk) 14:17, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- Guess you're right. Best to wait and see how things pan out. RashersTierney (talk) 21:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- I don't really know but there is limit of 15 govt. departments (inc. Taoiseach). Community, Equality and Gaeltacht has been split up with its components going to other depts. There is a new full senior Minister for Children, so thats another govt dept. Assuming that the new position of Public Expenditure and Reform is also going to be a full dept and not a part of Finance, then in order to keep to the limit Justice and Defence have to be merged rather than Shatter being a minister for two departments. Of course, I could be wrong. The picture should be clearer next week when more details on the re-org is published. Snappy (talk) 21:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- Any suggestions on the Justice/Defence dilemma? Is this a case of a 'new' ministry and the current articles are now 'historic', or has Defence been absorbed into Justice or vice versa or what? RashersTierney (talk) 21:27, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
29th Government
You seem to have reverted my edit of the article on the government of the 31st Dail alleging that it was pedantic and unnecessary disruption of the table of ministers. I dispute this. It was not a disruption it was an addition of information obtained from Iris Oifigiuil when it was published and added to the article in good faith. After all the departments have not been renamed or reorganised yet and I merely reflected this. The tone of your comment seems to suggest that i edited in bad faith. That i wish to point out is not true. I would ask that you moderate your comments and not attribute motives to my edits which do not exist. I was merely trying to be helpful after all I put some time into getting the information etc. Rigger30 (talk) 22:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
- I said it was pedantic, I stand by that. I did not say or imply it was disruptive or bad faith, that's what you're reading into it yourself. I won't moderate my comments but you should not seek to look for offence where there is none. At any rate, I have reverted back to your version. Also, I have to say that I find you mostly seem to edit wikipedia when new minister/office changes, and some eager IP puts in the name 3 hours ahead of the official announcement, then along you come to revert because technically you are right. Then someone else has to put back in the same name again when it becomes official. Personally I see no problem with wikipedia being 'incorrect' for a few hours because some piece of paper somewhere has not been signed yet. That's obviously where we differ in our editing approach, but you could spend your time adding useful info to articles instead. Snappy (talk) 23:48, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
- No offense taken and i wasn't looking for offense. It's just a consturction that could be put on your comment which i still belive was unfair but seeing as how you now say you didn't mean anything by it we'll leave it at that! Thanks for seeing my point of view. Nothing wrong with having an article 'incorrect' but equally nothing wrong with trying to correect it either. Thanks again. Rigger30 (talk) 08:46, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Service award level
There has been a major revision of the the Service Awards: the edit requirements for the higher levels have been greatly reduced, to make them reasonably attainable.
Because of this, your Service Award level has been changed, and you are now eligible for a higher level. I have taken the liberty of updating your award on your user page.
Herostratus (talk) 02:12, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Template:British Isles
Having not been very fruitfull at addressing the core issue anywhere else, the discussion you apparently want per this will now hopefully take place at Jimbo's talk page. I hope you can accept that of all people, he probably has an unbiased view, and a pretty good knowledge of how NPOV works. I hope you can drop by and give your views as to why this template has this unique functionality, that can be defended by edit warring even though nobody even noticed it was not present for four months. MickMacNee (talk) 01:20, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Help me out. Why are you so determined to have The British Isles instead of British Isles? GoodDay (talk) 20:16, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- I've replied on the template talk page. Snappy (talk) 20:17, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- You didn't explain what the 'complex problem' was. GoodDay (talk) 20:19, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- Please keep the discussion in one place on the template talk page. Snappy (talk) 20:21, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- I did. You can see the previous discussion on the page where I was saying the exact same thing months ago. You can see the link to Jimbo's page that I initiated after your 'request' to discuss it yet further, while not actually beginning any discussion yourself. If you have an actual point to counter the case for removal, by all means, explain it on the talk page, because you haven't as yet done anything of the sort. MickMacNee (talk) 23:51, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- Please keep the discussion in one place on the template talk page. Snappy (talk) 20:21, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- You didn't explain what the 'complex problem' was. GoodDay (talk) 20:19, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Succession boxes in multi-member seats
As you're probably the most active editor in Irish TD related articles, I wonder if you can comment here. Valenciano (talk) 00:20, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm planning to merge three sections into a more chronological account of his career, which is a fairly big edit since a lot of the stuff in there is all over the place timewise. Just wanted to check with you first to see if you're still editing, don't want to get into an editing conflict if you're working on it at the same time. Can I go ahead and make the edit? Thanks. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 18:45, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Quieter Life
Howdy, looks like you can look forward to a future without Lapsed Pacifist reverting your edits. Turns out he was socking his little heart out!. A user came up on my watchlist on Shell to Sea who looked a bit suspect so popped it up at SPI and turned up it was LP who also had a third whole other identity with a few thousand edits, so two different socks, mad! Looks like things might be a bit more civilised around now, he's been indef blocked. GainLine ♠ ♥ 13:11, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
- 2 other sockpuppets, the [expletive deleted]! Well done on rumbling him. He won't be missed. Snappy (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
- I got quite a shock when the second sock turned up, considering how active he was on it. After all the abuse that was leveled at me about being a hyprocrite and a sock, I always taught that with all the stuff he did on civil rights articles, LP was principled (at least on the basis of their own logic). It makes all the attacks seem that bit worse. (Is there any barnstars for taking abuse?!, might award myself one!) See you around, happy editing. G
ainLine ♠ ♥ 20:07, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
- I got quite a shock when the second sock turned up, considering how active he was on it. After all the abuse that was leveled at me about being a hyprocrite and a sock, I always taught that with all the stuff he did on civil rights articles, LP was principled (at least on the basis of their own logic). It makes all the attacks seem that bit worse. (Is there any barnstars for taking abuse?!, might award myself one!) See you around, happy editing. G
Your personal attack
Please link me to this "consensus" to overturn the pre-existing (over 6 years) consensus. The new lead is simply misleading in relation to many counties. Retract the accusation of edit-warring or stay off my page. Sarah777 (talk) 12:42, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- As civil as ever, I see. 16 blocks for various reasons hasn't taught you much now has it. Snappy (talk) 13:38, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Pearse Doherty
I thought that I had addressed your concerns; 1." unsourced trivia with ideological slant." 2."the language Doherty used in his court proceedings is not germane to the outcome." 3."rm pov not supported by sources" Perhaps you might be willing to explain where I am going wrong? Eog1916 (talk) 09:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
- I have replied on the talk page, please keep the discussion in one place. Snappy (talk) 20:01, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks Snappy for the reply. I will have to do some more research (not original of course) on the subject.84.203.136.210 (talk) 09:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
An appreciation
A thank you for your contribution and input with the Sheehan info-box, admittedly long over-due and oddly overseen. Much appreciated. Greetings ! Osioni (talk) 11:59, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
- Your welcome, and well done on your major contributions to the article, it's very good. Snappy (talk) 20:07, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Fine Gael and the definite article.
Why, in the English language, does the Labour Party take the definite article but not the Fine Gael party or the Fianna Fail party? Why "J. Bloggs, Fine Gael councillor for X Ward" not "J. Bloggs, the Fine Gael councillor for X Ward"? Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:12, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Ooh, that's an important question! Well, we say the Labour Party, but not the Fine Gael so I suppose it follows. Btw, I'm surprised you use ward, how outdated of you! For someone with detailed knowledge of the local governments acts, do you not know that wards were abolished yonks ago and replaced by Local Electoral Areas ?! Snappy (talk) 21:30, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Invitation to take part in a pilot study
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 19:22, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Lawlor
Thanks for adding the cats! -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:38, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Service Branch in the Infoboxes
Just regarding your reversion of the Martin Ferris article, do you think there is a case for including military background in an infobox, omit it or have a separate infobox? In the case of American politicians it's included in the main infobox while for the Constance Markievicz article it is kept seperate. Exiledone (talk) 21:42, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
- I think it should be omitted. Are you seriously comparing American politicians who served in the US armed forces with membership of an illegal terrorist organisation? Martin McGuinness has admitted to being in the PIRA, yet there is nothing in his infobox. Same for Bobby Sands and Gerry Adams. Also, I am getting fed up with infobox bloat, must everything thing go in it, can't it just be mentioned in the article? Snappy (talk) 17:02, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- I'll avoid going into the whole "terrorist semantics" and "whether the IRA was an army" debate and exclude any current SF TD's from it. Personally I'm a fan of infoboxes and I thought certainly in the case of Dan Breen, Constance Markievicz and Vivion DeValera it might be applicable. Exiledone (talk) 19:39, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know what you mean by "terrorist semantics" and "whether the IRA was an army" but now you are muddying things by citing Old IRA like Breen and PIRA like Ferris together. I've made my opinion clear on this, if you wish to pursue this issue further, I'd suggest starting a debate on WIkiProject Ireland. Snappy (talk) 22:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- I was just suggesting it be limited to people who were members in the Irish Defence forces or in the Old War of Independence IRA. Ill take it to Wikiproject Ireland.
- I don't know what you mean by "terrorist semantics" and "whether the IRA was an army" but now you are muddying things by citing Old IRA like Breen and PIRA like Ferris together. I've made my opinion clear on this, if you wish to pursue this issue further, I'd suggest starting a debate on WIkiProject Ireland. Snappy (talk) 22:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- I'll avoid going into the whole "terrorist semantics" and "whether the IRA was an army" debate and exclude any current SF TD's from it. Personally I'm a fan of infoboxes and I thought certainly in the case of Dan Breen, Constance Markievicz and Vivion DeValera it might be applicable. Exiledone (talk) 19:39, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Exiledone (talk) 23:13, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
I probably am missing something but isn't it the usual situation where something is in a subcat they don't get added to a parent cat? In the case of say Gerry Adams, doesn't Category:Members of the 31st Dáil automatically mean that he is a TD? Why the exception in these cases? Valenciano (talk) 21:13, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Any ideas? Valenciano (talk) 21:15, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- Looking at the category, all TDs are in it. Sometimes articles can be in parent and subcats, the rules/guidelines seem a bit vague. Snappy (talk) 21:17, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- Fair point. I'd always just assumed that large cats like that should be diffused but I've just looked through similar MP cats and they're split between those which diffuse and those which go for both. It's something that should be agreed one way or the other, so I'll leave them be until that's clarified. Incidentally, great work on adding the older election results to the Irish constituency articles, it might seem like a thankless task but elections anoraks like me do appreciate it. Valenciano (talk) 21:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not sure about the cats. Usually, when I have a category question I ask user:BrownHairedGirl, she a bit of an expert in the area, but she's on wikibreak til next month. I'll leave a query on her talk page when she returns. Thanks for you comments on the election results, currently at 1938, should only take a few more months! Snappy (talk) 22:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- Fair point. I'd always just assumed that large cats like that should be diffused but I've just looked through similar MP cats and they're split between those which diffuse and those which go for both. It's something that should be agreed one way or the other, so I'll leave them be until that's clarified. Incidentally, great work on adding the older election results to the Irish constituency articles, it might seem like a thankless task but elections anoraks like me do appreciate it. Valenciano (talk) 21:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- Looking at the category, all TDs are in it. Sometimes articles can be in parent and subcats, the rules/guidelines seem a bit vague. Snappy (talk) 21:17, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Re:John Whelan
My apologies. I misread the Oireachtas spreadsheet there. Was meant to put down an entirely different person who got elected. And yeah lol sry about that glaring error.
Exiledone (talk) 22:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Template:Vic LGA
A tag has been placed on Template:Vic LGA requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. LordVetinari (talk) 08:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Workers' Party
My apologies: in fact, I had half-filled the template for requesting a move, but I got bored half-way through. I'll finish the request presently. --Kwekubo (talk) 16:30, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series3.002.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series3.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series3.010.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series3.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series1.001.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series1.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series1.002.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series1.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series1.010.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series1.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series2.001.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series2.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series2.010.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series2.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series2.002.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series2.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:35, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series1.005.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series1.005.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:35, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series1.100.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series1.100.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series2.005.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series2.005.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series2.050.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series2.050.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series2.100.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series2.100.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series1.020.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series1.020.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series1.050.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series1.050.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series2.020.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series2.020.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series3.001.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series3.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:39, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series3.010.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series3.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:13, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.va.series3.002.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series3.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:16, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Template:British Isles has been protected to allow for discussion of its title. It has been possible to change the title of this template on a page-by-page basis. Titles that have been used on different pages being:
- British Isles
- British-Irish Council area
- Great Britain, Ireland, and related islands
- British Isles — or Great Britain, Ireland, and related islands
A user has raised the question of whether this practice is a violation of NPOV.
A list of alternative solutions (aside form those being reverted between) is invited also. --RA (talk) 21:03, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Stadium vs Stadia
I do not deny that in many instances the information included on your revert is correct - but stadia is the more correct term given its usage in higher register including government documents, as I have indicated on the talk page. Please undo your revert. Grand High Most Ultimate Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia, the Universe and all parallel Universes (including Ireland and Wales) (talk) 18:19, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Taoisigh's Irish names
Nothing in Wikipedia:IMOS#Naming_people which you mentioned prohibits listing the Irish version of their names, especially since we are talking about the leader of Ireland. I actually bothered to read through that link, sorry...--MacRusgail (talk) 20:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Given that the Taoiseach is one of the best known people in Ireland, it certainly does apply here. This is just another example of the petty bureaucracy which infests Wikipedia these days and produces no benefit whatsoever.
I didn't move the page to his Irish name, I merely listed what it was. There is nothing wrong with that, and nothing against the IMOS.--MacRusgail (talk) 11:46, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
The plural of euro is euros
Yes, it is. Cheers, -- Evertype·✆ 22:45, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
AN/I
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 46.7.72.149 (talk) 19:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Two-mile Borris
Well done for spotting the error in coordinates - don't know how I missed that!Autarch (talk) 12:56, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, I was looking up the Tipperary Venue and clicked the coords to find out exactly where it is; somehow I didn't think Lowry's influence extends that far! Snappy (talk) 19:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Katherine Zappone
Katherine Zappone is listed on the Oireachtas website as an independent Senator. She does not take the Labour Party whip. Therefore she is not technically speaking a labour party politician — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirage26 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- She must have changed her mind then, because she had a page on the Labour Party website. Snappy (talk) 18:45, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
David Norris song
Your input is welcome here. Regards, BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 21:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.lu.100.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.lu.100.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.lu.050.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.lu.050.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:38, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.lu.020.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.lu.020.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:38, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.lu.010.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.lu.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:53, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.lu.005.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.lu.005.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.lu.002.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.lu.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.lu.001.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.lu.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.nl.050.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.nl.050.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:55, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.nl.020.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.nl.020.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:55, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.nl.010.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.nl.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:55, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.nl.005.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.nl.005.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:56, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.nl.001.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.nl.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:56, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.nl.002.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.nl.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:43, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ie.001.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ie.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ie.002.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ie.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ie.005.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ie.005.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ie.010.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ie.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ie.020.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ie.020.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ie.050.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ie.050.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:09, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.be.100.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.be.100.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:46, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.be.050.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.be.050.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.be.020.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.be.020.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:55, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.be.005.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.be.005.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:58, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.be.002.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.be.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:01, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eur.be.001.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eur.be.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Myles Keogh talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Snappy (talk) 21:49, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.nl.100.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.nl.100.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:31, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
External links
Hi! About this edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Department_of_Transport,_Tourism_and_Sport&diff=432377611&oldid=432298501
In articles related to agencies about the Irish government (and other Ireland topics), on the English Wikipedia there should be links to the Irish language content in addition to the English language, because Irish is an official language of Ireland. The practice is usually to link to the English links and to the native/official language links, depending on the subject.
If this was a topic related to England, and that website happened to have Irish language content, it would not be appropriate to link to the Irish language content in that instance, since the Irish content is merely an extra, and not reflective of official language status.
In most links related to the State of Texas, I only link English because the state has no official languages - Spanish links are relegated to the Spanish Wikipedia. But in the cases of Finland and Israel, I link multiple languages (Finland has Finnish and Swedish as official, Israel has Hebrew and Arabic) WhisperToMe (talk) 19:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Formal mediation has been requested
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Michael Kennedy (Dublin politician)". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by July 18, 2011.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 21:41, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Request for mediation rejected
The request for formal mediation concerning Michael Kennedy (Dublin politician), to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
For the Mediation Committee, AGK [•] 21:11, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)
Eamon de Valera
Sorry for my misinformed addition to the intro of Mr de Valera's article. Which state was he head of state of? The Irish Republic? I was just trying to clarify, as we can't just have that he served as head of state and government of Ireland (i.e. the island) in the lead when it's simply not true. Best, JonChappleTalk 20:13, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- Bump. JonChappleTalk 19:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Read the article, the info is all there! Also Government of Ireland does not refer to the state but the nation. Snappy (talk) 19:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hardly. Does the Government of Ireland exercise executive control over Northern Ireland? JonChappleTalk 19:55, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- No, nor does it claim to but that its name because the name of state of which it governs is Ireland, only on en:Wikipedia is it called Republic of Ireland (Read the intro and footnotes for more info). This is an old issue which has been re-hashed many times, many places here, so if you have any specific points to discuss, please start a new section on the relevant article talk page, as my talk page is not the appropriate place for this. Rdgs, Snappy (talk) 20:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- I'm aware the state's name is "Ireland", and that's what the Ireland in Gov't of Ireland refers to—i.e. the "state", not "the nation", in your words. Anyway, I've rejigged my edit of de Valera's intro. Ta-ta. JonChappleTalk 20:07, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- No, nor does it claim to but that its name because the name of state of which it governs is Ireland, only on en:Wikipedia is it called Republic of Ireland (Read the intro and footnotes for more info). This is an old issue which has been re-hashed many times, many places here, so if you have any specific points to discuss, please start a new section on the relevant article talk page, as my talk page is not the appropriate place for this. Rdgs, Snappy (talk) 20:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hardly. Does the Government of Ireland exercise executive control over Northern Ireland? JonChappleTalk 19:55, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Read the article, the info is all there! Also Government of Ireland does not refer to the state but the nation. Snappy (talk) 19:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Flags
Nice work removing flags from biographical infoboxes, for example here. WP:MOSICON is pretty clearcut on the subject. --John (talk) 19:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
fionan lynch
Hi Snappy
Apologies, but I am not sure how best to communicate through Wikipedia. I noticed that you have recently amended the page on Fionan Lynch.
Fionan Lynch is my grandfather and I have a couple of photos which I would like to add to his wiki page. I have not got enough edits to be permitted to add photos - are you able to do it for me?
thanks Gerard Lynch
GSLynch (talk) 13:09, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hi there, you can upload the photos yourself to Wikimedia commons (shared image space for all wikis). see here and select the upload file option on the left, this starts an upload wizard which will guide you through the steps. If you own the copyright you can release the files into the public domain using the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 license. If the images are over 70 seventy years old then they are already out of copyright and are in the public domain. Note that copyrighted images are not allowed on Wikipedia. If you have any other queries, just ask. Snappy (talk) 15:11, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Ireland (state)? that reminds me, the 2 year hold on discussing page moves at Republic of Ireland, Ireland & Ireland (disambiguation), ends next month. GoodDay (talk) 15:47, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:Executive Council of the Irish Free State 1928.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:47, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Fianna Fail page
I added a section to the Fianna Fail page on it's organisation. If you could go over it it'd be a help. Compared to other articles on Irish political parties, it's a bit of a mess. Exiledone (talk) 15:32, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Poor edits on Gay Mitchell page
It appears that you are randomly moving and removing headings without consdering the content, your previous edit left text relating to expenses issues under a heading of "Clemency pleas", your current edit has "Views on homosexuality" as a sub-heading of "Political Career", I don't think that makes sense, can you please sort it? Damiantgordon (talk) 21:32, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
- I have tried your fix your biased edits. BLP are supposed to be balanced and neutral, you are just writing a hatchet job. Snappy (talk) 22:06, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
- Look I'm not interested in starting trouble, all I would like is that you sort out the headings so that they make sense, you've left them in an inconsistent state. Damiantgordon (talk) 22:25, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Poll on ArbCom resolution - Ireland article names
There is a poll taking place here on whether or not to extend the ArbCom binding resolution, which says there may be no page move discussions for Ireland,Republic of Ireland or Ireland (disambiguation), for a further two years. Fmph (talk) 21:46, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
David Norris
I am just wondering, why you keep changing David Norris' religion being kept as 'Anglicanism' - it is what he is and it keeps a flow in presentation with other Irish Presidents or candidates who share that religion?
- See Elizabeth II. Snappy (talk) 17:40, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
New Page Patrol survey
 New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Snappy! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:20, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
Irish presidential election, 2011
Considering putting that for GA? You shouldnt have much probs with that b/c its damn well sourced and extended.Lihaas (talk) 12:27, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Dáil constituency names
I've (constructively) criticised some edits of yours at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland#Dáil constituency names. No offence intended! jnestorius(talk) 20:28, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Higgins
I hope that my reply to you at Talk:Michael D. Higgins reassures you about my attitude to trivia — a distaste we both share. — O'Dea (talk) 18:55, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Here is the historical logo of Fine Gael, it had a St. Patrick's Saltire on a St. Patrick's Blue field
The St. Patrick's Saltire on a St. Patrick's Blue-field flag was not just the flag of the Blueshirts, it was the flag of Fine Gael that succeeded the Blueshirts and a number of conservative Irish nationalist groups. The Blueshirts ceased to exist in 1933. Here is the logo that says "Fine Gael": [4]--R-41 (talk) 18:34, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
![[4]](http://cdn1.beeffco.com/files/poll-images/normal/fine-gael_7790.jpg){kind=link}
Snappy rv's
Just wondering why you have change my edits on a number of articles from Ireland to Republic of Ireland. "In other places prefer use of Ireland, except where the island of Ireland or Northern Ireland is being discussed in the same context or where confusion may arise. In such circumstances use Republic of Ireland (e.g. "Strabane is at the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland").An exception is where the state forms a major component of the topic (e.g. on articles relating states, politics or governance) where Ireland should be preferred and the island should be referred to as the island of Ireland, or similar (e.g. "Ireland is a state in Europe occupying most of the island of Ireland")." I dont see how ambigious misconception would occur . Basic your edits mean that Ireland should never be used .Murry1975 (talk) 15:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Snappy, this question is being discussed on the manual of style talk page. Regards, --RA (talk) 09:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
listas in WikiProject Ireland
This is a very minor quibble, but I really see it alot with WP Ireland. FYI... You don't have to add listas in the {{WikiProject Ireland}} template per the edit you did in Talk:Liam Ryan (politician) and others. The only place it should go in biographies is in the WikiProject Biography banner. All templates use listas from WP Biography. But, other templates won't use it from WP Ireland depending where it is located on the talk page. Bgwhite (talk) 06:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
active pol
Hi , regarding that template - is Kenny - running for office or campaigning for re-election, or involved in some current political conflict or controversy? I though he is in office and not involved in any controversy is he? that because of the article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. - this considering my request for the long term semi protection of the article that was granted yesterday seems redundant? Youreallycan (talk) 00:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- I removed it - I welcome you persuading me it is relevant or beneficial to the article at this time - regards - Youreallycan (talk) 00:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- He is in office, and is a head of government and according to the category description - ""Active" means that the politician is in the media's eye enough for there to be an increased risk of vandalism or more sophisticated pro- and anti- PR edits to the attached article.", therefore as such it applies. Snappy (talk) 17:30, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- "in the media's eye enough for there to be an increased risk of vandalism or more sophisticated pro- and anti- PR edits to the attached article."- - I totally disagree with you, the edit history supports simple only childish vandalism - I had the article semi protected - the templates of no value to the article at all. Youreallycan (talk) 19:07, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- He is in office, and is a head of government and according to the category description - ""Active" means that the politician is in the media's eye enough for there to be an increased risk of vandalism or more sophisticated pro- and anti- PR edits to the attached article.", therefore as such it applies. Snappy (talk) 17:30, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
You are missing the comma out - This page is about an active politician who is running for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.
an active politician who is running for office? - NO
is in office and campaigning for re-election? - NO
is involved in some current political conflict or controversy? - NO
In the last seven months there has not been any talkpage comments at all of any description. The article has just been semi protected for six months - what benefit is there from the addition of this template? Youreallycan (talk) 19:20, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- There are 2,346 articles in this category including for example David Cameron, so the same criteria apply for him as for Kenny. If you want to remove Kenny then you should remove most of the rest. From the Template:WikiProject Biography, it simply says "|activepol= Answer yes if the article is about a currently active politician". This implies that is perfectly fine to use it on Kenny's page. Snappy (talk) 22:16, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I noticed you reverted an IP on this article , I have found several other edits by them and have brought it to the attention of IMOS. They have been doing thier thing since at least June and most of their edits follow the same pattern. Just letting you know incase you find more . BTW they IP hop.Murry1975 (talk) 12:31, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- ^ "Hugh Sheehy". hughsheehy. Retrieved 14 February 2011.