User talk:Vintagekits

This is a troll-free zone.

This editor has full permission to remove, without replying, any comments he feels are likely to inflame dispute. If you have a problem with this editor, you are invited to bring that concern to the attention of User:SirFozzie or another member of the administrator community, but please bear in mind that we have a zero-tolerance approach to harassment. Constructive dialogue is always welcome, but if your message is removed it is safe to assume that User:Vintagekits has read it and chooses not to debate with you at this time.

Archives
Archive 1 - 5 August 2006 to 25 January 2007 Archive 2 - 25 January 2007 - 5 February 2007 Archive 3 - 5 February 2007 - 8 March 2007 Archive 4 - 9 March - 14 May 2007 Archive 5

Comments from unregistered users will be deleted!

Regarding query

Sorry I must have missed your question, which template talk page was it on.--padraig3uk 23:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

This one, Template:United Kingdom regions regards--Vintagekits 10:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I put a reply in the Template talk:United Kingdom regions page, I will try to add more detail later.--padraig3uk 11:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Socks

Probably our friend in New York, I'm 99% certain on the Sarge but less so on the General. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Gerry Storey

Boxrec is wrong on that one, from what I can tell it's got him confused with his son Sammy who was an active amateur boxer in 84 and 86, so makes more sense that it's him. Plus according to this he was 63 in 2005 (although this says he was 70 in 2006), so there's no way he was having his first professional fight in 88 or born in 63. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 07:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, don't break the article! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 08:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually I think it must be another son of his called Gerry. Sam had a far more glorious career.--Vintagekits 09:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well either way it wasn't him :) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 13:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Alright, alright you win! Wot it does highlight however is dat da article contains nutin bout Gerry prior to becoming a trainer, surely he must have had an amatuer career and more than likely a pro career also. --Vintagekits 13:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well the closest I found is him being described as a budding talent in 1948, if you want to try and find amateur records from then be my guest! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 13:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment

Do you recall our mutual friend Bill Tegner? He has returned under a new name, Millbanks. If you happen to see him POV pushing again and/or using talk pages to promote his own personal opinions, please let me know. Thanks. IrishGuy ^talk 07:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Will do.--Vintagekits 21:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Bobby Sands Man

His previous talk page and contributions shows he's not going to listen to reason.... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 10:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

A Chicago IP address - I'll say no more!--Vintagekits 10:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

That would be a first for you ;) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 10:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Oi cheeky! I have infact had very little to say with regards the lastest bout of AfD's on my Scotch friends.Vintagekits 10:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, things seem to be going well without involvement from us, so I'm staying clear as well. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 10:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

One Night In Hackney, reason? You are the one that has failed to give any reason for why articles about Irish Republicans should not go by the same standard of articles for everyone else on wikipedia. One Night In Hackney, you are letting your bigotry get in the way of using reason. One Night In Hackney does not base any of his edits on logic, just hatred. Bobby Sands man 03:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Sacked yet?

I'm assuming going on "boychat" must be a sackable offence? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Well if I saw that on an employees web log I wouldnt be too impressed!--Vintagekits 16:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

On a completely unrelated matter, just to clarify....you watched that video yet? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I did - feckin rabble of repribates! Should at school the wee feckers!!! ;)--Vintagekits 16:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

As the description shows, part of it was that they weren't being allowed to go to school! And anyway, your man in the link above doesn't mind starting them young ;) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:39, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The Troubles

There's a stubborn IP POV pusher, and I'm at my limit. Care to oblige? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:IR

Don't put that on people's talk pages please, it adds them to the article category. I'll whip up one that you can use for advertising later. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 09:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Right - sorry!--Vintagekits 09:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I noticed it the other day and had to edit a load of pages. Something like that would be handy though, I'll do it after the Cup Final. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 09:26, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

But we dont play Dunfirmline until next week!--Vintagekits 09:39, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

The proper cup final :P One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 09:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

FFS we play summer football now and that wont be for months!.--Vintagekits 09:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not going to let you bait me! I'll also whip up some sort of welcome template for new members as well, I've seen other projects have something similar and we're sadly lacking one. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 09:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

IRA Northern Command

Happy now? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

You know what, I was gonna do that today - honest ;)! I'll do the Southern for ya!--Vintagekits 14:59, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll tart it up more after the second half, if I don't fall asleep.... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 15:00, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

You're being talked about ...

.. on WP:ANI here. It seems User:Kittybrewster has made a complaint about your behaviour but has not seen fit to notify you. Notifying :) - Alison ☺ 16:54, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

VK is on ANI most days, there's not normally much need to tell him ;) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:03, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Sort yourself out

Turncoat eh? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• I removed the turncoat reference. Barry aywite in ma book, even if for the good night he gave my ould fella in Loftus Road.--Vintagekits 19:26, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• I didn't know Barry swung that way :/ One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• Lol!!--Vintagekits 19:39, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Prison Ships

Can you advise, or preferably comment at the project talkpage? A combat where none should exist is being generated. I've reverted his/her edits once already, a discussion is being refused on the edits being made. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Irish Republicanism#Prison Ships Fluffy999 00:19, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Ships are apparently "top" priority VK, I'm still laughing now..... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 00:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

How about?

The Irish Republicanism WikiProject is a collaboration of editors dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of Irish republicanism, Irish nationalism, and related organizations, peoples, and other topics. (For more information on WikiProjects, please see Wikipedia:WikiProject and the Guide to WikiProjects).

Just type {{Wikipedia:WikiProject_Irish_Republicanism/Template:WPIR}} to put it on an editor's talk page. Any suggestions for improvements welcome naturally. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 13:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Top class! I'll spam it everywhere! ;)--Vintagekits 15:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look later. Media player stopped playing sounds for some reason, even though everything else still played sounds. So I decided to install a legal version of Windows, and accidentally selected a wrong installation option so I'm busy recovering most of my hard drive including bookmarks grrr! I can't even get the keyboard working like a normal keyboard either, I just wasted five minutes trying to find the tilde then realised I could click on the button above :( -- One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

All gone pear shaped. Any Irish rebel music gratefully received :( One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 18:57, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Why not nab - THe Patriot Game?--Vintagekits 18:58, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Sean O'Callaghan

I removed the reference to Dr. Tiede Herrema from the article, he was kidnapped in the 70s.--padraig3uk 20:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

User page

Keep an eye on it please, I'm off away for a couple of days and I don't want many repeats of this and my request for temporary protection was declined. Ta. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 09:03, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Bruises

Yeah perhaps, but how big is the dent in your forehead from all that bashing, before you get a result! - Is it worth it? Giano 17:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

For example [1] Is this an encyclopedia or a mad house. Giano 17:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I know, there are a core of about five editors that all back each other up no matter what the argument or the facts, and they have abused the AfD and editing system for many months now - they is zero objectivity but I am not sure that there is anything that can be done about it.--Vintagekits 17:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh yes, because we question the notability of architectural gems and leading pressure groups. --Counter-revolutionary 17:55, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

You comment says it all!!--Vintagekits 18:00, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

User:84.68.67.13

Is in breach of WP:3RR if that was one of us we would be reported, I put a message on his user talk page, hopefully he will stop now.--padraig3uk 20:03, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you report him, I haven't worked out yet how to.--padraig3uk 20:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Aint got time pal - sure you'll have to learn sometime anyway! ;) --Vintagekits 20:22, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

I have blocked you for 48 hours under the no personal attacks policy for this. You really ought to know better by now, having been blocked three times previously for personal attacks, at least twice involving the same target. If you can't behave appropriately towards User:Kittybrewster and his cohorts, you're going to end up with a long term block. | Mr. Darcy talk 02:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

• This block is outrageous, that an editor can add God knows how many pages of uncited rubbish drivel and trivia to Wikipedia, refuse to acknowledge flaws in facts until they are almost rammed down his throat is ridiculous. Where were you when Kittybrewster and his friends were inferring Vintagekits was a member of terrorist organizations etc? I think you should apologise to Vintagekits and unblock immediately. Giano 06:08, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

It seems that I have been blocked for this edit. And that this "More Arbuthnot lies" seems to be the this portion that is being focused on here and here. For the record I was not calling a personal editor a liar. I was stating that the information in this source " Mrs P S-M Arbuthnot “Memories of the Arbuthnots” (1920). George Allen & Unwin Ltd." was lies.

• Reason to unblock - It seems that I have been blocked for this edit. And that this "More Arbuthnot lies" seems to be the this portion that is being focused on here and here. For the record I was not calling a personal editor a liar. I was stating that the information in this source " Mrs P S-M Arbuthnot “Memories of the Arbuthnots” (1920). George Allen & Unwin Ltd." was lies.

My comment was made of the AfD of the George Bingham Arbuthnot article. The only source that is in that article and its information (or misinformation) has again been proven to be incorrect or misleading. This not the first time yesterday that the information from this source was proven to be incorrect, infact another article which is up for AfD, namely Alexander Arbuthnot (bishop), the same source stated that he and others in the family had their seat at Rockfleet Castle - this was also proven incorrect by User:Giano II. So for the record I am not personally attacking any editor, I am infact attacking the lies (although I probably should have said misinformation as I did later in that edit) that is held within what is after coming underscrutiny an unreliable source (and source that on many occasions is the sole source in an article).--Vintagekits 10:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Further comment, The admin that has blocked me here is Mr. Darcy, he seems to have a particular harse attitude towards me and infact he has blocked me before for what he said was taunting - infact it was a formatting issue and was overturned as can be seen here and more can be seen here for the type of approach and abusive language that Mr. Darcy uses when dealing with me.--Vintagekits 10:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I have unblocked. The blocking itself should be warning enough to Vintagekits to mind our policies (if reminder be needed).

There are widespread concerns about the Arbuthnot articles, given the paucity of verifiable information in them. I would not call them "lies" but they have a strong smell of unfiltered family history. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I have just seen the comment immediately above. I trust that you need no reminder to, inter alia, remain civil and avoid comments that can be perceived as personal attacks. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, I should have said misinformation not lies - I am sure its not deliberate lies just a case over these people being viewed through "Arbuthnot tinted glass" so to speak. In any case, thank you for removing the block.--Vintagekits 10:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

ALoan, I still dont seem to be able to edit. --Vintagekits 10:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Autoblocks

I've removed two autoblocks, but for some reason they still seem to hang around. I suppose that's either database lag, or else they're being recreated because you keep trying to edit. I'll try again. Please don't attempt to edit until I give the ok. (However, do reply here on this page, to show that you're hearing me.) Bishonen | talk 11:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC).

It's looking OK now, I guess it was lag. Please try to edit and let me know how it goes. Bishonen | talk 11:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC).

Thanks.--Vintagekits 12:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, sorry - forgot the fscking autoblocks. You would think that a button that says "unblock" would actually do that... -- ALoan (Talk) 12:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Re-blocked

Sorry, Vintagekits, but I have re-blocked you, as the unblock seems to have been based on the erroneous assumption that I was unavailable for discussion. (You should see the discussion about your actions here.) I've restored the 48-hour block. It doesn't matter what you think of Kittybrewster's edits; you can not continue to talk to other editors in that manner. | Mr. Darcy talk 13:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Nonesense - the reason for the unblock is clear - "10:22, 23 May 2007 ALoan (Talk | contribs) unblocked Vintagekits (contribs) ((a) what kind of "personal attack" is that? (b) perhaps a warning first?) " - not because you were away but buts it was an incorrect block and totally without justification - which seems to be the consensus in every discussion about this!--Vintagekits 13:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The reason for the block is clear: You have a long history of incivility and personal attacks towards other users, specifically Kittybrewster and Astrotrain. I have no idea why you continue to behave the way you do when multiple admins and editors have indicated to you that it's inappropriate. Incidentally, I really enjoy your claim that I'm biased against you - you were more than happy to stick up for me when I blocked Kittybrewster back in March for using nasty language towards you. | Mr. Darcy talk 13:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

You are totally bang out of order and I hope you get stripped of your admin powers for your persistant abuse. The last time you blocked me you were wrong and I was unblocked and this time you are again wrong. Like I said I was not calling the editor Kittybrewster a liar I was saying the source that was being used in the article we were discussing was lies - and it was proven to be incorrect. You dont seem to be able to make the distrinction between the source and the editor. Please show me exactly were I attacked the editor Kittybrewster. You are a disgrace!--Vintagekits 13:12, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to unblock you. I must caution you that while it's apparent now that you were commenting on the veracity of the source and not the user, that was not obvious at the time, and since they're one in the same calling the source a liar is effectively the same thing and unnecessary–if the source is incorrect, say so. I urge you to consider an RfC on the Arbuthnot issue, and possibly the IRA as well. Best, Mackensen (talk) 13:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

If there was an ambiguity he should have asked me what I meant and not blocked me! As for the "Arbuthnot issue" - I dont have a problem with Arbuthnot's per se - I have a problem with notability anyway I am happy to engage in any discussion. --Vintagekits 13:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Whatever the outcome of these blocks and unblocks, I strongly urge you to change your behavior regarding user:Kittybrewster. The simplest and best solution would be for you both to disengage from each other, in your case by avoiding dealing with any Arbuthnot-related issues. Those issues are being addressed by other editors so your participation is not required. If you feel you must participate I urge you to avoid making any comments about user:Kittybrewster, and to keep any comments about William Arbuthnot as neutral as possible. You have been blocked for personal attacks several times before and future blocks may be substantially longer or even of indefinite duration. ·:·Will Beback ·:· 22:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree - there are plenty of other useful things to be done, and rubbing each other up the wrong way just gets in the way. -- ALoan (Talk) 22:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

All I will say is that a lot of this has been brought about Kitty himself 1. he choose to write countless stubs about non notable members of his family and he drew other editors attention to his own article through the abuse, vote stacking and canvassing on AfD the he either liked or dislike. Here is one that he liked and here is one he didnt - now if you can tell me that they arnt abusing wiki then I will stop.--Vintagekits 22:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Put the stick down, it's not going to achieve anything. As you must have noticed by now, the Arbuthnots are being dealt with by a group of more experienced editors. All you are doing is carrying on the dispute, when there's no need for it. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

HPA

• I think that question is irrelevant. Wikipedia does not require a register of members' interests and allows for anonymity. --Counter-revolutionary 14:21, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Its not really irrelevant. I am not asking for your name or anything it is a COI issue that I am interested.--Vintagekits 14:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Boxers

Have you ever written an article about someone who couldn't "compete at divisions either side"? ;) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:08, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Its my catch all - because as soon as you say somenone was a Middleweight some smart arse points out that he started as a Welterweight and finished up as a fat bloater of a Light heavyweight! ;)--Vintagekits 17:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Have you any info on John McQuade apparently he was also a professional boxer under the name Jack Higgins, but I don't much know else about his boxing career.--padraig3uk 17:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

doubtful--Vintagekits 17:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Getting there

All done apart from the images which are difficult, so the project should have its first good article soon. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Nomination

Ah I knew about that. I was planning to post about that later. I don't need it now anyway and it's all safely saved off-Wiki as well so I can just produce the evidence at will whenever it's needed. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

No Problem

You have reason to feel hard done by, and I've been keeping a bit of an eye out for the situation. I just offered ONiH a bit of unsolicited advice (worth every bit you pay for it, of course) that another clash with Kitty's Kin is not in your best interest, and it might be best to ask an AN/ANI admin to keep an eye on the MfD.. the more eyes that see their behavior, the better chance you have of getting the result you want. SirFozzie 23:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Welsh Guards

[2].

At one stage I was adding the innocent victims of British Army action. However the general consensus would seem to be that victims are not notable but I personally do not have the stomach to remove memorials to dead British soldiers. Aatomic1 00:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC) PS I do think that Stronge and Dennis Donaldson were shot; possibly even shot dead. Aatomic1 00:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Come again? Are you saying that folk killed by the BA were ruled out by Wiki on the grounds of "non-notability" but that named BA members are regarded as notable? (Sarah777 23:09, 26 May 2007 (UTC))

Easter Rising

What do you reckon to adding this to various articles? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 15:40, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Tis kwalite, I say tis kwalite!--Vintagekits 20:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Well I can't take all the credit for it, as all I did was nick the hunger strike template and change it.... ;One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Latest developments

Interesting! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 11:40, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

It had to be done

Clicky clicky. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Harsh but fair!--Vintagekits 20:40, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Willie and Danny

Well can you sort this section out then please? Look at the second paragraph, it says "at the time the pair were at the hospital". Then two paragraphs later you finally name the pair and have them arriving at the hospital. Try and put it in some sort of order that makes sense...the other paragraphs aren't great either. First you have Willie being knocked off the bike then being shot, then you start the next paragraph with Willie having just been knocked off. Ideally you want to have Willie being knocked off and the bike going out of control and Danny being thrown to the ground, then deal with what happened next to both of them. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

David Lauder

There is an even tempered discussion which will hopefully settle both your feelings on comments made by David Lauder to you here [3]. It would be nice if the negative commenting between you could stop. Giano 10:40, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Damaen_Kelly.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Damaen_Kelly.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yonatan ^talk 12:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Cool, sorted!--Vintagekits 12:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Image

What city is Image:Hunger strikers memorial photo.jpg in please? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:40, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

So...about that photo? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Ford's Cross, Silverbridge, Armagh. regards--Vintagekits 12:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Sandyford CC

Reply on the talk page.....(Sarah777 23:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC))\

WP Boxing

How about we kick start it here and avoid all those stupid ip addresses and vandals. Andman8 23:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd prefer to keep it here to be honest.--Vintagekits 14:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Hurrah ...

... I've been vandalised! Thanks for the clean up. --sony-youth^pléigh 23:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Interesting

See [4] and [5] I would say this is the same editor trying to avoid 3RR.--padraig3uk 20:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply - Falklands War

Sorry, I have been away for a while and have only just picked up your message. Being a bear of little brain I can't remember the debate in detail, so I'll have a re-read of the discussion page (it won't be tonight as I am somewhat jet-lagged) and suggest something. Best. LeeG 23:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:John Duddy.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:John Duddy.jpg. 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 06:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Help

You might be able to help me for a page I am writing User:Giano/Exploding Houses - I cannot remember the name of the country house in Ireland that was completely destroyed in an IRA? attack sometime in the 1970s, any idea what it was called? - "Drumsomething" rings bell but may be wrong - google is no help. Giano 09:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I dont know Giano - COunter-rev might be correct with his answer.--Vintagekits 12:51, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, any suggestions welcome though! I just want 2 or 3 important Irish houses one knocked down by its owner and another as a result of troubles and one anywhere that was bombed in eiither of world wars - only condition is that nothing has to remain today. Giano 12:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I have a very good book entitled The Lost Houses of Ireland - there are a lot of them, but I cannot see one destroyed in any way which commences with Drum... Also, as Eire was not a participant in World War II I think you may be hard-pressed to find a house which was bombed during that conflict. (Planes from the continent could not reach Ireland in The Great War). Regards, David Lauder 13:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

No, the war-time bombed country house can be anywhere, so long as it was completely demolished - I might change the name of the Irish section to "houses at war" or something corny like that - I'm just trying out some ideas to liven the page up a little - it is finding something a little different to make the page more interesting and readable than what is written elsewhere on the subject. Giano 14:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you saying the house had to be bombed by terrorists then? As late as WWII? I've found another book here entitled In Ruins - The Once Great Houses of Ireland. It's a tragedy looking through it. David Lauder 14:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

The British Army had nothing to do with it - if you cant be civil stay off this talk page!

You are funny VK! I think it's Drumbanagher, David, by Playfair. It was just demolished. I know the first book to which you refer, but don't (yet) have a copy. --Counter-revolutionary 14:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

No, the page is about the destruction of country houses and loss of architecture,not politics the IRA or the British army or even Nazis. There will be a fair selection of all architectural types and all causes of destruction during the 20th century will be explored proportionatly. Most of them (I would guess 98%) were destroyed by their own owners. It would be false to suggest that only the IRA (or similar) were responsible for bombing/burning houses, which is why I'm looking for some that were bombed during World War II, or even possibly World War I. The other option if not enough turn up in that category is to explore the ones so damaged by war time service and requisitioning that they had to be demolished anyway. Thanks all of you for your help - there is no need to edit the page David thank you, I'm a very untidy worker and it is months from being finished, and the finished product will look nothing like that. Please leave any further comments or thoughts you may have on my talk. Thanks Giano 14:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

My comment was not directed at yourself - my comment was directed at Mr. Lauder labelling of the IRA as terrorist - if he does that again he will be removed from this talk page. As long as he is civil and balanced then he will be tolerated.--Vintagekits 14:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

We're trying to move away with all that. Don't take it so seriously when we're off topic. --Counter-revolutionary 14:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I am also trying to move away from that, however, labelling the IRA terrorist is not in the spirit of moving away from anything infact I see it as an attempt to enflame things just as they are calming down.--Vintagekits 14:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

"Low"

If pointing out spelling mistakes is "low" then god help our schoolteachers, proofreaders and editors. I did not use the spelling mistake in any form of ad hominem argument, did I? So what exactly is your problem? The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 23:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd just rather discuss the meat of an issue rather than pointing out spelling mistakes. You are supposed to discuss other peoples comments not correct them like a schoolteacher.--Vintagekits 23:15, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Lord Chief Executioner

Check out his quote I've added. Sadly I decided to go for the less controversial one, his other comment was "that unctuous self-righteous fucker". One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 23:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for welcoming me! I had never met an Irish wikipedian before. At WP:AR we have promoted William Brown (admiral) to Good Article!--Argentini an 01:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

"British whitewash"

Hi! I see you've decided to contribute to WikiProject Argentina. Please try to discuss civilly regarding the name of the Falklands War. By definition, if someone disagrees with something due to how it's presented, it's OK to demand NPOV, but you absolutely have to assume good faith and discuss with Wikipedia policies and guidelines on your side. There's no concerted British-led effort to rid Wikipedia of the word "Malvinas", and suggesting otherwise is only hurting your cause. Maybe the article can do without an NPOV tag for now, since that's mainly when the discussion has been long and undecided and problematic. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 10:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually I am not being uncivil and I am assuming good faith. I have been trying to discuss this issue since January and have been ignored until I put the NPOV tag on it. Not one person is willing to give an explanation as toi why the islands shouldnt also be refered to as the Malvinas and as you can see here, here, here, here (I could go on - now these editors are only removing the alternate name with the word Malvinas in it and not any others despite the fact that the Malvinas one is the ONLY one that is referenced additionally, altough they are willing to reference the referenced material they are not willing to enter into a discussion about it on the talk page. regards--Vintagekits 11:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

As your your suggestion that the tag should only be used "when the discussion has been long and undecided and problematic" I would suggest you read this to see my attempt to resolve the situation here - my attempts have been stonewalled.

Paul McCloskey

Sort the links out ;) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

reply

I'll make sure to do that and thanks for offering, and the same goes for you if I can lol

Divisive userbox

Hi. I note you have the following on your user page at the moment: "The Ulster Banner" - This user opposes the ongoing campaign to remove this sectarian rag from Wikipedia". I wonder if you might consider toning it down? I am not a great fan of flags on Wikipedia as you know but this kind of thing offends people, and seems to offer no advantages in return. Let me know what you think. --Guinnog 23:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem as soon as that flag that offends me is removed from wiki I will then remove the comment you believe may offend others. regards--Vintagekits 23:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I see this along with some of your edits on the Falklands War as being indicative of a problematic attitude towards editing this project, Vintagekits. Please remember this is a collaborative thing and we must work together on it. It is not a soapbox, and your perceptions of bias may be better addressed than by edit-warring or the display of offensive matter on your user page. --Guinnog 23:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Listen Gunniog, just because you have different views to me, you made that clear on the strawpoll on the Northern Ireland page - you were in the minority there so you should accept that, that does not give you the right to come on here a throw unfounded accusations around. I am discussing the issue on the Falklands page (like i have been trying to do since January) so do not accuse me of edit warring - your bang out of order.--Vintagekits 23:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Vintage, if another user copied the userbox but changed the image to that of the Irish tricolour, would you find that divisive or offensive? I don't like the Ulster Banner either, but labelling any flag "a sectarian rag" seems deliberately inflammatory. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 08:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the user box per [6]. It is obviously causing offence and likely to do so to many more users. As there is plenty of confrontation going on nowadays, I would have thought you would have the good sense to tone things down, not add more provocation. Tyrenius 12:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

How about removing it from all the articles and templates where it's being used incorrectly and causing offence as well then? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 12:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

You are able to do that yourself if you think it's the right thing to do. Tyrenius 14:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

As you're well aware, Astrotrain and Jonto (amongst others) are happy to revert that change until the cows come home. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I haven't been following it. There is WP:DR. The matter can be taken through various stages all the way to ArbCom if necessary (as you're well aware). Please don't adopt such a negative tone to me because of disputes with others. It's very disagreeable. Tyrenius 14:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't intend it to be negative sorry. You banned Astrotrain from editing various templates for that specific reason if you recall? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I do recall the ban, but I've forgotten what article it related to. It was over the mode of editing, not content as such, but it seems then that I have already acted in the area you request me to. However, that certainly lends weight to any case you wish to further. Creating provocative user boxes is not the way to achieve anything (something you might like to consider). It's petty. I'm sure you know all this already. These kind of conversations really are a waste of time. Better to edit something worthwhile. Tyrenius 14:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

These kind of conversations really are a waste of time. Better to edit something worthwhile - indeed, I'm just in the middle of about 80 things right now so aside from some minor tinkering I'm not doing much editing until later. There was a lengthy discussion here as well as at Talk:Northern Ireland about the use of that flag, and in what context it should be used. Although I agree it should only be used in certain circumstances, I don't have the time or energy to get involved in a dispute over it, as it's just non-stop edit wars and short of an arbcom ruling I don't see it being settled any time soon. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Patience is often a good way to sort out problems. Tyrenius 03:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Antoine Mac Giolla Bhrighde

You got a citation for what I've just tagged please? It's not in Moloney. Ta. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 23:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks like a mix of Tirghra and "The Sas inIreland" by Ratmond Murray.--Vintagekits 23:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not in Tírghrá, and I don't have a copy of Murray and it ain't on Amazon or Google books free preview. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 23:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

It must by Murray then but I know Tirghra mentions his career in the regulars. I will fish it out tommorrow.--Vintagekits 23:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Malvinas

Man, I really think you are not getting anyway with that aproach to the Falkland/Malvinas thing. I strongly suggest you discuss things in the talk page before actually making any changes to the page. I also don't think focusing on the name is that important; the article is definitelly biased, but the naming is no the most important thing. Cheers, --Mariano(t/c) 00:31, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree. As a neutal party to this disput, I need to ask you, Vintagekits, to tone things down. Shouting and the other comments you're making in your edit summaries are inappropriate. The lead paragraph had been stable for quite some time until you changed it without discussion, then accused others of edit warring when they tried to put it back. That seems a bit unfair. When a subject is this sensitive, it is really vital that you propose the new text on the talk page first, discuss it, be willing to bend a little and have references for what you do. I'm remaining neutral in this, and I have restored the stable version. I strongly ask you to please respect that version and my neutrality until you and the other editors can come to a consensus as to what the new wording is going to be. Discuss first, be civil, be respectful. A war was fought over the islands, we don't need a war fought over the article. AKRadecki 02:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposal: Variants of the abolished NI Flag in Template:Country data Northern Ireland

Hi, you might want to voice your opinion in a proposal I made in Template talk:Country data Northern Ireland#Request for edit. As the discussion has been going on and the page is quite cluttered, here my proposal in short:

Inclusion of variants in the Template:Country data Northern Ireland as follows:

| flag alias-cgf = Image:Flag of Northern Ireland.svg still used by the CGF (Commonwealth Games Federation)

| flag alias-patrick = Image:Saint Patrick's flag for Northern Ireland.svg

| flag alias-map = Image:Alliance ni flag.png File:Alliance ni flag.png, which I find aesthetically more satisfying than

| flag alias-union = Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg as the only official flag of NI

The defenders of the abolished flag argue that this flag is still used in context with the Commonwealth Games. I think that the inclusions of variants is the first practical step in discontinuing the use of the abolished flag in articles about biographies and international organisations (like the european parties). AFAIK, a map tag is already in use in articles about NI geography; this map symbol was never intended to be used as an icon, and I think the usage of Image:Alliance ni flag.png looks better.

I would welcome your input to this debate greatly.

Kind regards, Dingo 05:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC) (currently anonymous)

Userbox

I've just added a rather fetching new one you might want too, seventh one down ;) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Your robbed that off Southie didnt ya.--Vintagekits 22:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I resemble that accusation! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:46, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I reincarnate it also.--Vintagekits 22:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Didn't you nick the aforementioned sectarian rag userbox anyway? ;) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

It was an homage!--Vintagekits 22:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Typical Irishman, you'll be quoting me a price for a new drive next.... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:55, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Racialiseristic! Lucky heather!?--Vintagekits 22:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Henry Wharton

Are you planning to do an article on Yorkshire's favourite fighting Irish gypsy any time soon? If not, I might. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I am sure he is redlinked in one of my articles - but no I aint got any plans for the York tinker!--Vintagekits 21:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a quick stab at him in the next couple of days, once this is finished. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I noticed you were doin something on Paul. Whats the latest wit hthe filming that they were doing about him? Also in the Wharton article make sure you dont use the term "or division either side" or else you will be hearing from my little Kitty!--Vintagekits 21:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Aye, almost finished. Just need to fill in the stuff before and after the split with Thompson, and some stuff between 94 and 96. Plus if I get his latest book I can probably expand his post release stuff better. Not sure what's happening with the film, what generally happens is they get announced as a possibility, then get tied down in finding finance and pre-production for what seems like an eternity. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Did ye see what else I was up to? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

No, what?--Vintagekits 22:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Link? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Handing out meaningless awards amongest themselves without doing anything to deserve it - and then theres the Barnstars issue aswell!$Insertformulahere$

Sounds a bit like the soggy biscuit loving aristoracy in general really! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:25, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I like!

That raised a smile. I wish some people would improve articles instead of arguing over minor points though :( One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 11:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Now thats what I call insight!--Vintagekits 11:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Line of the day - Wikipedia is not a reliable or objective source, and its procedures for verification of facts and prevention of deliberate inaccuracies are inadequate. For reliable information, please consult Who's Who or Debrett's Peerage! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Check the history

I reverted at 9:16, same time as your comment. Never saw it. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Cool, Anyway I was not just talkin about meself either. You shouldnt just ignore Paudge's comment either - he's trying to talk it out.--Vintagekits 21:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

No, he wasn't. Fuck him, he contributes hardly anything except edit warring. If people want to be dicks I can find plenty more things to do with my time. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Mountain out of a mole hill my man.--Vintagekits 21:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Nah, simple case of lack of respect. Check his recent comments. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd say communication breakdown rather than lack of respect. His names is Charlie, granted its OR but only very marginally. Anyway - thats that and all that. Lets solve the issue and then we can have hugs all round.--Vintagekits 21:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

You're missing the bigger picture. There's a fecking huge expand template at the top of the page isn't there? So why has he wasted two days arguing over a name and providing quotes from books that mention Northern Command? Haven't you noticed that the information could have been added to the article? If people want to fanny about arguing over things that don't matter when there's far more important things that need doing all power to them, I've had enough of it. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Yer not wrong but I think the original focus was on correcting the name - but your right his efforts and energy could be better deployed in more constructive manners/matters.--Vintagekits 21:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Firstly I haven't disrepected you, if that the impression you got then it was never intended, I corrected the name and you reverted it and called it WP:OR, I provided sources to prove that Tim Pat Coogan was wrong in this, yet you still reverted the edits I made, I have other info that could be used to expand the article, but what is the point in me adding this if your going to continue to revert every edit that disputes your source. The last link that I put on your talk page proves without doubt that Coogan is wrong I added the link into the article talk page as well. So can we forget all this nonsense.--padraig3uk 21:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

That and that (and a couple of others) are OR. I checked the book remember, all it did was confirm there was someone called Charlie, not that it was the person being referred to in the article. And rather than wait until a source that was acceptable to me was provided, you persisted in edit warring over it. In case you hadn't noticed there are slightly more important things to do than correct whether someone's name is Charles or Charlie, or whether a flag is on a template or not. If you want to waste time that's up to you, but please don't waste any more of mine. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

You spelt his surname as MacGlade rather then McGlade which makes a big difference, that is what I edited, yet you reverted it, I also pointed out he was known as Charlie rather then charles.--padraig3uk 22:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

That would be because the source spells it "MacGlade". Shame on me for following the source eh? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you now accept your source is wrong.--padraig3uk 22:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you accept you've wasted two days of your time and mine over something trivial? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The answer to both is yes!--Vintagekits 22:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I see ONIH has now deleted the article and turned it into a redirect page.--padraig3uk 16:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Broadwater Farm

(Crossposted to assorted "people I've run into and whose opinions I respect") I realise it's totally outside your field, but if you get the chance could you take a look at the article on Broadwater Farm I've recently created? I do think it deserves it's own article - yes, it might be most famous for events that happened 22 years ago, but having it as a redirect to Broadwater Farm riot seems to me as ludicrous as redirecting Germany to World War II or Northern Ireland to IRA. However, now I've set up incoming links it's likely to be a beacon for POV-pushing, so I'd like to get opinions on (a) what a NPOV will be on something like this where the two POVs are likely to be diametric opposites, (b) whether you think it can/will ever be stable (and whether it's worth trying to keep stable) and (c) how much of a focus ought to be on the riots as opposed to the place itself. If any of you feel the urge I'd also appreciate anyone who feels able/willing putting it on their watchlists, as I suspect it's going to be heavily vandalised & spammed — iridescenti (talk to me!) 00:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:IR prep pages

Where are they ?.--padraig3uk 15:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Canvassing

He posted there knowing very well it would skew the afd away from being a true representation of the community's views and result in a flood of votes to keep which is exactly what it has done. If there was an anti-Peerage or anti-Non notable cruft Wikiproject with as many members maybe we could say it has been balanced out but currently I would say that the afd will not represent community consensus (see also discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#What_to_do_if_an_article_has_been_AfD.27d.2C_but_major_contribs.2Fwikiprojects_were_not_notified). Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 16:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding my talk page

Thanks for reverting the vandalism, it is greatly appreciated. Keep up the good work around Wikipedia! :) FirefoxRocks 18:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Troll

G'day Vintagekits,

is there something we should know about between you and Astrotrain (talk · contribs)? It's only an old man's curiosity, but I'd be interested to know why you think it's acceptable to call your fellow users nasty names. Cheers, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 13:34, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Here is a good starting point. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 13:36, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Its a long story. Please check his disruptive past and edit history. He is an edit warrior and for the past three months has actually given up on contributing to wiki and is happy staying off talk pages and simply editting warring. --Vintagekits 13:38, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

It takes two to edit war. It takes one to call someone a "troll". I appreciate that you two aren't exactly members of each others' fan clubs, but I still don't see why you thought it was appropriate to leave an edit summary like that on the article Edwyn Burnaby. I'm also interested to know how you came across the article in the first place. Cheers, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Only one person is a troll if the other person uses the talk pages. If you care to take the time to go through Astrotrains edit history and then you still are of the same opinion then I will be happy to discuss the the issue with you.--Vintagekits 14:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I've gone through the RfC. You appear to be under some misapprehension as to the meaning of the word "troll"; it doesn't mean "person whom I dislike", and even if it did, it would still not be appropriate to bandy the word about as you have done. Please desist.

If you have legitimate concerns with any of Astrotrain's behaviour in the future, feel free to let me know, and I'll be happy to deal with it as an alternative to seeing more insults issue from your keyboard. Cheers, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

No I consider a troll as someone who is just happy to stir up shit and not engage in rational discussion and is just happy that they have caused a little bit of hassle. Astrotrain is not interested is solutions, discussions, advancement, compromise, debate etc he is just interested whipping up trouble and perpetuating old arguments - the facts are plain to see.--Vintagekits 14:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

This and this show his predilection to reverting without discussion, which as can be seen here has previously been the source of controversy. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Your view is that it's acceptable to engage in personal attacks provided the other chap is sufficiently unlikeable? Look it, as I said above, if you see him acting inappropriately in the future, let me or another administrator know. I will be happy to deal with any problems. On Edwyn Burnaby (I'm still interested to know how you lot came across that article, by the way), however, he's clearly not the aggressor, and Vintagekits has clearly engaged in unnecessary personal attacks. That sort of misbehaviour is to cease, okay? fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 15:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

"You lot"? I've made no edits to the page in question. I just happen to have VK's talk page watchlisted. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 15:13, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

A poor choice of words. I apologise. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 15:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

What personal attack? Per - WP:TROLL - "Trolling refers to deliberate and intentional attempts to disrupt the usability of Wikipedia for its editors" and " troll deliberately exploits weaknesses of human nature or of an online community to upset people." = his sole purpose on wiki has become to wind people up and cause arguments.--Vintagekits 15:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I could point to a definition of "dickhead" and say that Astrotrain meets it, and it would still be a personal attack. Surely you have better things to do with your wikitime than stress over Astrotrain and sour the atmosphere with insults? Move on. If he doesn't allow you to, feel free to come chat to me about it, and I'll see what I can do to fix the situation. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 15:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll leave it for now, but he will be back tommorrow or in three or five days time - he'll make a load of reverts against consensus and no attempt to discuss and then be off again.--Vintagekits 16:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Kitty canvas

Raise it on the AfD page for the closing admin and see discussion on WP:VP - sorry I don't have the exact link. It's not a clear-cut situation. Also I second MarkGallagher on the discussion above. Tyrenius 02:41, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Userbox 2

Feel free to use. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 11:31, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

That is disgusting - please do not ever post anything like that on my talkpage again! (aye right!)--Vintagekits 12:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

It's been nominated for deletion anyway :( One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 12:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Shocking. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 12:44, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Cease fire on the minor nobles front

Hi there, just wanted to send a friendly note after we crossed swords today on the AfDs here and here. There's obviously some kind of history between a couple of groups of editors which I've stumbled into, and I don't want to get drawn any further in, so I shall now hold my peace! I enjoyed reading your talk page, and some of the articles you've contributed to (which I usually look at, to get the measure of someone I disagree with on Wikipedia!) I think the rough and tumble of editorial debate usually leads to improvements here, so long may they continue - under Queensberry rules, of course! Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 17:02, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Dont worry about it.--Vintagekits 20:42, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

PA

I can remove PA's without regard to 3rr or anything else. If you want to report your PA on me be my guest, SqueakBox 18:09, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Actually you cant, 2. I will!

Indents

DennyColt complained of the same but sure, SqueakBox 21:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR

Hi. I saw and closed your report there. SqueakBox technically did revert three times, but he was removing material which (in my view) constituted an uncivil comment by you about him. In the future I want you to pursue your efforts to improve Wikipedia without resorting to name calling as you did in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Mabel Fitzwilliam (2nd nomination), in this edit for example.

I find it problematic that you write such things ("Comment, Please note this !vote [is in retaliation for my !vote opposing] this editors positon on another AfD and should be discounted.") about another user. How could you possibly be so sure of the motivation someone else has for doing something? Please always comment on content and not the contributor.

I find the edit summary you used troubling. "(If you revert again you will breach 3RR along with wikis code of tempering with others comments - enjoy your holiday if you do!This whole situation is of your own making and I will NEVER forget it)". In the process of using (or trying to use) our rules this way, to enforce an uncivil personal comment to another participant in an AfD, you reverted three times yourself.

Some suggestions: Reread Wikipedia:Three-revert rule as it is clear you are not familiar with its contents. Three reverts are absolutely not an entitlement. Edit-warring is very frowned upon, even if you stop at two or three, especially if you make a habit of it, and especially when what you are reverting is (at least arguably) a personal attack. Another interesting resource you should look at is Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary.

Please do not again repeatedly add personal comments during a discussion, and please do not again try to game the system by threatening another user with a block as you have here. I will be messaging Squeakbox separately. As you and I have bumped into one another a few times here already, I'll ask another admin to review my action here, as well as any block that becomes necessary. I trust we won't need to head in that direction though. Best wishes, --John 21:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

1. So if he doesnt like a comment he can remove it AND get immunity from WP:3RR -- thats total BS and I have never seen that allowed before. --Vintagekits 21:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

If you are accusing him of voting in retaliation for something else, during a deletion discussion, I would always remove that myself if I saw it. If it isn't taking the discussion forward, there is no place for it. If you talk about an article, you talk in terms of policy and consensus. If you have a problem with another user, you use the steps in WP:DR. Please don't get the two mixed up like this again, and everything will be fine. --John 21:27, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

You are totally out of order - and infact I am disgusted with you. He can ONLY remove the comment if they are libelous - not because he doesnt like them - just giving him carte fucking blanche to do whatever he wants and when he wants has really pissed me off and then you warn me. Calling into question his motives is standard practice and he confirmed his motives on his talkpage. --Vintagekits 21:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest SB's actions are contradictory, given he's removing material that's allegedly critical of himself yet making unfounded accusations of sockpuppetry in the same discussion. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:31, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually it wasnt me who suggested sockpuppetry, someone else did that and doubtless if vintage hadnt made attacks against me that wouldnt have happened either. I certainly did not accuse Vintage of sockpuppetry in the afd discussion, SqueakBox 21:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes you did, and I'll happily provide the diffs to prove it if asked. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Diffs to my page please, SqueakBox 21:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

As if John gives a shit - did you see the messege he has left on Squeaks talk page? One rule for one and another for the Irish!--Vintagekits 21:32, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Knock it off with the personal attacks Vintagekits. First an unhelpful attack on SqueakBox, then a positively lame revert war over keeping it, and now this disgusting allegation of ethnic bias against John. Consider this your final warning before I give you a block for as many days as personal attacks and other incivilities I can find in your contributions since the beginning of the month. (In case it makes any difference, I'm part Irish and wear a bit of green on St Patricks day - and I endorse every letter of John's comment.) Picaroon (Talk) 21:54, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Well I am going to remove any and EVERY negative comment about me from now on and if anyone says anything about it I am going to come to you and John and ye are gonna sort it out for me, right?--Vintagekits 21:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

See below, I'm not knackering my browser on your unarchived talk page. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:06, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Important

If I start intervening in a way you dislike in your favourite boxing articles you can assume I am there to piss you off as I assumed that re the paedophilia article you made strange comments on the other week but if I comment or get involved in anything to do with the British nobility please can you assume it has nothing to do with you. Such an assumption would be spot on, SqueakBox 21:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Squeakbox's sockpuppetry accusation

At 19:25 this edit was made by User:Counter-revolutionary

• The above user has only made about 10 edits [7], notably on other controversial AfD's by User:Vintagekits

At 19:26 Squeakbox replies on CR's talk page with this edit

• Obvious Vintage sock given his/her edits to Talk:Falklands War, supporting his obsession that its called the Falklands/Malvinas war lol as well as Vintage's other favourites. Try a checkuser (note, the Falklands War refers to this edit)

At 20:46 Squeakbox makes his next edit to the AfD in question.

• This article is full of socks, at least one of whose master is obvious

So if you weren't still referring to Maplecelt and Vintagekits, pray tell exactly who is the obvious sock of whom? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

It's gone very quiet all of a sudden.... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

hello

hey, I didn't mean to be so accusatory or beligerent either. I was thinking about what I posted earlier, and I didn't mean to come off the way I did. sorry about that. I guess my point, being from America, it's hard to tell what the British levels of government and everything are, and to me, if this guy was appointed to an office of...what was it...leichester? or something like that, which google says is equivalent to a US County. So, given that, I figured that was good enough. That may not be right, and so if it's not, I'm sorry. The thing about wikipedia policy in general in terms of notability for politicians is that it's exceedingly vague; I've seen a number of these disputes and I'm rarely entirely convinced something should be kept or deleted. I share the view, like yourself, that Afd Discussions aren't votes, they're discussions. Given that, I felt at the time that your comments were possibly deverting other people from participating, but after this gesture and after thinking about it, I think I was entirely wrong on that, and I'm sorry. Cheers from across the pond, no hard feelings I hope! Barsportsunlimited 23:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The Bhoys from Seville

What was wrong with leaving it commented out while you work on it? --John 00:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

No comment on SB removing "attacks" by one editor then afterwards making "attacks" of his own in the same discussion while you're here then? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 00:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:RS has "Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy, or are authoritative in relation to the subject at hand." and also "If all the sources for a given statement or topic are of low reliability, the material may not be suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia."

This description seems to fit the V for Victory thing to a T. Thoughts? --John 01:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

These may help [8][9][10] Rockpocket 02:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Cheers Rock, they were already in the article. Feel free to improve the article if you can. It really needs a paragraph on each round before the final - fancy doing that? regards--Vintagekits 02:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, yes, I probably should have read the article first. I'll perhaps see what I can do later this evening. Rockpocket 02:22, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Rockpocket, these were better sources than the Ross County Celtic SC website! It's still an icky story, but at least now it can be properly referenced. --John 04:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually the BBC reference was already in the article!

James Carrey (informer)

Can you either have a look at this yourself or pass it on to someone who's in a position to? I came across this on stub-sort patrol, and while I think he really does warrant an article, this is an outright mess which probably ought to be prodded — iridescent (talk to me!) 11:21, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• I think the guy has spelt his name wrong, it should b James (or sometimes) Jimmy Carey (just one R), he definately exists and played a key role in the Phoenix Park murders, one of the main events of Irish 19th century history. A fuller article could be written be maybe is should a redirect.--Vintagekits 12:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Bhoys from Seville - attribution

I don't see any examples of this in the article. WATP  ^(talk) • _(contribs) 16:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

How long do you want to go on for? Please stop removing comments, this is clearly against WP:EQ. If you don't agree with the comments, answer to them, but don't remove them. And please let me know where is this "famous" John's intervention. --Angelo 17:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I hope this clears things up for you. WATP  ^(talk) • _(contribs) 17:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

YEs it does, it confirms its a personal attack.--Vintagekits 17:33, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

So you consider those comments like "personal attack"?!? I would consider them instead like a reasonable doubt by a Wikipedia user. And John suggested you to have a look at WP:DR - did you? It doesn't seem, according to your recent behaviour. --Angelo 17:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

As an admin John sets the precedent - I simply follow his ruling. It you have an issue take it up with him. Now both of you stay of my talk page or I will report you both for harassment.--Vintagekits 17:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bhoys from Seville

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bhoys from Seville. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Ryan Postlethwaite 18:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

You know, until that last comment about you being treated unfairly for being Irish, I was actually considering letting you off with one final warning. Shame. Picaroon (Talk) 19:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah right!--Vintagekits 19:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

After reviewing the AfD mentioned above, I believe there is enough evidence to open a sockpuppetry case.

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to [[Template:Highssp]] for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Template:Do not delete EliminatorJR ^Talk 00:02, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

• Crack ahead then. They have nothing to do with me. Let me state that again - nut tin ta do wit me.--Vintagekits 00:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

• Nothing personal, as I think your AfD work is pretty good. A lot of coincidences though. EliminatorJR ^Talk 00:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

• I dont and cant control what other editors do - how the fuck am I supoosed to defends myself against this!?--Vintagekits 00:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Similarly, I have nothing against you, Vintagekits, but have added another editor who appears co-incidently with your editing to the list. If there is going to be a case for consideration, everything may as well be laid out on the table. If you are innocent, it shouldn't matter who many false socks are put forward, right? In terms of defending youself, if you have something you wish to say while you are blocked, feel free to say it here and I will move it across to the evidence page. I guess a checkuser may resolve the situation. Rockpocket 00:33, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

• Seen as its you and you've been fair with me before, I'll take no offense. Anyway as for defending myself - there is nothing I cant say except its nothing to do with me.--Vintagekits 00:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

• To be honest, I don't think they are sockpuppets of your either, if only because I don't believe you to be that stupid. However, if you review the evidence, i'm sure you can see how it could raise suspicions. Something weird is going on here for sure, but it is entirely possible it is happening independent of you. The best way to tackle this is to ride it out, remain and calm an civil, and wait for the checkuser. If it comes back in the negative then you will have been vindicated. The worst thing you can do is get irate and abusive over it. I'll keep and eye on things and make sure things are done by the book. In the meantime, take some time to cool off and, when the block expires, come back refreshed. Rockpocket 00:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Vindicated? Not so. Check user is good at proving guilt and lousy at proving innocence, SqueakBox 02:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

• Aye, agreed - that's pretty much what I said in the SSP, especially as Maplecelt certainly appears to be Canadian, which just makes the diffs even weirder. EliminatorJR ^Talk 01:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Meatpuppet? Closed proxy? SqueakBox 02:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Or maybe you should just stop assuminng bad faith and admit you're completely wrong? I notice you went very quiet after I posted the diffs proving you wrong before. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 03:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I never got those diffs. And I went offline last night, other life and that, which is why I went quiet. I havent actually accused Vintage of having socks, apart from the edit to Tam's page tonight after the sockpuppet case was already opened, others have done that. He's a good editor and once he learns how to get on here he'll have no problems, and in my desiring that I definitely have a good faith attitude to Vintage, SqueakBox 03:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome to reply now then. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 03:33, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes we were getting a bit muddled, I did indeed suggest such a thing to counter-revolutionary but didnt put those direct accusations on the afd page, but its a reasonable assumption even if it were to turn out to be a wrong one, SqueakBox 03:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

So you havent actually accused Vintage of having socks even though you actually have. --Barryob Vigeur de dessus 04:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Not on the afd and I certainly didnt open the sockpuppet page, SqueakBox 04:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

So exactly which sockpuppeteer and master were you referring to when you said This article is full of socks, at least one of whose master is obvious? I look forward to your answer/prevarication (delete as applicable). One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 04:13, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

{reset indent) VintageKits, so as you say, its looking like these accounts are not socks of yours. Thats good. Can you also confirm that they are not meatpuppets, i.e. you did not ask them to !vote at those AfD's for the purpose of vote stacking? Rockpocket 20:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

This isn't going to go away, Vintagekits. I would hate to see you blocked or banned, so how about an answer to Rockpocket's perfectly reasonable question? --John 17:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Redirects for Peers/Baronets

Hi Vintagekits. Per the administrators closing judgement on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/John_Arbuthnot,_6th_Viscount_of_Arbuthnott you don't need to be bother with afds for the clearly non notable peers/Baronets, just redirect them to the relevant Baronetage/Peerage page. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 02:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Thank you for your kind words, Vintagekits. Yes, the most one-sided arbitration in Wikipedia's history rankled with me, too. When I have more time I will almost certainly appeal that decision. Good luck.Lapsed Pacifist 13:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Good luck to you too LP! If there is anything I cant help you with feel free to drop me a line. slan.--Vintagekits 13:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use

The image you are repeatedly adding contains in its licence the clause "This image is of a DVD cover, and the copyright for it is most likely owned by either the publisher of the DVD or the studio which produced the DVD in question. It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of DVD covers to illustrate the DVD in question..."

As the article does not currently discuss the dvd but is rather an account of Celtic's cup run that season, the image is clearly being used in flagrant breach of its licence. Please remove it or I will take this further. Thanks. --John 14:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The DVD is discussed in the artile and I am going to add further information about the dvd also. If you wish to push your POV further and stir tut because you are bitter about something go ahead but your mask has not only slipped but gone for good.--Vintagekits 14:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

That's fine. See you at AN/I. --John 14:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I have now taken my concerns over your behaviour to ANI as I feel we need wider input. I will not tolerate your continual attempts to challenge everything you disagree with in terms of ethnic bias. I sincerely hope that in spite of everything we can somehow find a way of allowing you to edit productively here. --John 16:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I find it very interesting that you had previously contributed to the article but then as if over night consider the article non notable. I also find the profile of the delete/merge !voters very strange.--Vintagekits 16:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why you would find that strange. I contributed to the article, but I no longer think it is worth keeping; we could merge any useful content into the UEFA Cup Final and History of Celtic F.C. articles. Frankly at this stage I am less concerned with the article than by some of the outrageous behaviour at the AfD itself. Civility is an absolute non-negotiable thing on Wikipedia, and I am really getting tired of all the ethnic slurs and non-sequiturs you are throwing around. Coming back from a block and immediately going back to the behaviour you were blocked for implies you have not learned from the block, and that is depressing for me as I do think you could be a useful asset to Wikipedia, if you could somehow interact more productively with others. --John 16:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

You are the root cause of the bad behaviour on the AfD! You do realise that dont you.--Vintagekits 16:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

(deindent)No, I don't accept that. Everyone is responsible for their own behaviour. --John 16:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

• Well then you are blind to your own actions and I find you throwing your weight around as an admin disgusting and the blatantly twisted post on ANI is simply beyond belief!--Vintagekits 16:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Peter McBride

Yeah, cheers that'd be good. :) I'm trying to use just newspaper reports/amnesty etc rather than the family's/victims' sites due to potential 'bias' accusations. But there's plenty out there so it's def achievable. Any help or insight would be much appreciated.GiollaUidir 18:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Good shout - I think you should move your personal page into the WP:IR domain and that way other can help to.--Vintagekits 18:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

YouTube, etc.

Thanks - I didn't know that. I have not used a link to the video, but I have used the YouTube page as a reference - is that OK? Thesean43 20:18, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The Bhoys From Seville!!

Im Glad you are helping me or im helping you together we can make it some article Bobo6balde66 20:54, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Well it deserves to be imo!--Vintagekits 20:55, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/celtic/3189853.stm thats not the 'Fair Play' award is it! Bobo6balde66 21:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

UserBox

I see you got a new userbox, very nice.--padraig3uk 21:47, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

cheers bud - nabbed it offa Sarah777.--Vintagekits 21:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

RFC

Sense at last.... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 12:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Marthín Ui Sabhadh (Volunteer)

I couldn't see that much in the online references, I'll have a look through some books as well though. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:02, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Dan Breen loved him and took him under his wing when he arrived in Dublin from Sligo, so therefore he is referenced throughout his book My fight for Irish freedon, he also has a number of pages dedicated to him in the Worthies of Sligo book. I'll get crackin.--Vintagekits 14:06, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Good work mentioning Breen, I knew there was a book I needed to order. As for the other "book", surely an A4 piece of paper only has one page? ;) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:10, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Ouch - so cutting!--Vintagekits 14:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

428 pages! Jesus tapdancing christ, how big is the print?! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Lol! and double line spacing too!--Vintagekits 14:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Do Volunteers Coen and MacManus (and another that escapes me at the moment) get a mention? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:27, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Nah, tis an auld buke.--Vintagekits 14:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I just looked on Amazon and it said 1994 and nothing about reprints or anything. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

sorted

Malvinas 25

On BBC1 now, it's vomit inducing really! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 15:20, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I wouldnt lower myself to watch it to be honest.--Vintagekits 15:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I turned on the TV to look at Teletext! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 15:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I just wswitched over to see the fat freeloading parasite doin his impression of "war hero" the cheek of the bastard.--Vintagekits 15:51, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

It took me a while to realise you were talking about the ginger lover. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 15:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Nah he's probably to only decent on of them all - maybe cos there not one drop in him. His lovable, huggable uncle.--Vintagekits 16:02, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

You've lost me now. I'm talking about Prince (no need for vanity titles) Andrew, who you waffling on about? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:05, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought you were talking about "the ginger lover" not "the lover of gingers".--Vintagekits 16:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Same thing! A chubby chaser isn't a fat bloke who runs after people... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:08, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

"the ginger lover" not "the lover of gingers".--Vintagekits 16:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Meh, I was more surprised that chubby chaser had its own article, I assumed it was going to redirect somewhere. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Our friend

New York IP. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I know - see his messege to Astro.--Vintagekits 16:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Ouch One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Collooney railway station

Hi- I restored the AFD link given it has now been listed. I imagine it will be kept given most UK railway stations are listed articles. I am afraid I don't know if the editor is a sockpuppet or not. Thunderwing 21:05, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I am not an admin and cannot complete userchecks. I suggest contacting another admin or post at WP:CHECK Thunderwing 21:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

IR

Thanks for the invitation. A couple of years ago, when I was working on the convict era of Western Australia, I did a bit of work on the Fenians transported to Western Australia in 1867. When I saw you tag Catalpa rescue, I thought I'd tag the other relevant articles. But I've moved on from that topic now, so won't be joining up.

I recommend you extend an invitation to Ghostieguide. He is on extended Wikibreak, but if and when he returns I expect he'll be keen to participate. Hesperian 01:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Sligo photo

Yes, I thought that was an interesting photo. It looks a little hazy, how did you get it, out an aeroplane window? --The.Q | Talk to me 09:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, on a plane on the new route, the outside of all the windows were all very scratched. I took a few more also.--Vintagekits 11:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:North Sligo Town 1.jpg - this version is a bit clearer. What do you think? Tyrenius 19:20, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Much better - how did you do that.--Vintagekits 19:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

You need some image processing software to tweak a photo. Photoshop is widespread, but pricey. Jasc Paint Shop Pro is much cheaper, especially for an older version like 8, which is still available for £10.[11] Or Google it.Tyrenius 19:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Notable Players

Lol.You obviously think Keano should be added to Celtics notable players section,do you think any others should be added?(LiamD1 20:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC))

Notability of Michael Thompson (Aryan Brotherhood)

A tag has been placed on Michael Thompson (Aryan Brotherhood), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Corvus cornix 23:26, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you should reconsider your opinion given the detail in the article. regards--Vintagekits 23:39, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Getting there

Onwards and upwards. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 12:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Its a cracker.--Vintagekits 13:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Aye, I found a monument in Dublin anyway, so I got rid of that nasty NI term again. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 13:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I was gonna say to do want me to find ones in the 26?--Vintagekits 13:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't really think we need any more. I changed it to allay his concern and he passed it as GA, then I found details of one in Dublin so added that and changed it back. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Good work a chara.--Vintagekits 14:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I've put in a request for peer review anyway, so assuming it's FA class worthy and everything can get sorted in time I'm aiming for it to be the featured article of the day on 3 October. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

User talk:LiamD1

Hi Vintagekits.

1. Very well done for creating Charlie Gallagher. I mean it.
2. Please don't moan or snipe at me on other users' pages; you know where mine is if you want to talk to me.
3. As I said earlier, I am having trouble assuming good faith on your part because of your recent challenging behaviour and incivility (for which you were blocked).
4. You have recently continued to be uncivil in making various allegations of bad faith against me. I include, by the way, your continuing attempts to edit against the consensus at Celtic F.C. in this.
5. As I also already said, it might be better if we avoid interacting with each other until we see what happens with the open case against you.

I really hope that clarifies things. In spite of everything, I wish you the best, and I wish I could give you a barnstar as I gave to User:LiamD1. --John 19:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

• 1. Thanks for that, 2. As and when clarification is needing regarding you it will occur. 3. That makes two of us. 4. You have an imaginary concensus, 5. If you stayed out of my business I wouldnt be in yours - havent you got an Ebbra article you could be editing somewhere? 6. How very big of you but I dont accept Barnstars - I hold them in the same high regards I holdBaronetcies, Lord Lieutenancies and the like.--Vintagekits 19:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

You been on the turps?

See here. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Where's mine?

Don't I get a thanks ya fecker?! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 01:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

You get nothing but a dirty look!--Vintagekits 01:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh didn't I vote on that AfD? So much for the existence of an alleged Irish Republican Cabal then! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 01:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Oi! If Astrotrain say there is one then there is one get that through yer provo luvin, beadrattlin heid right!--Vintagekits 01:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I forget he's always right, like that 1982 Assembly that never existed. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 01:39, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Oi

have a good break.. first of all.. don't feel like you have to come back till you're good and ready.. it'll be a bit weird with the time differential, but you'll find me on basically all hours (sometimes feel like I have to, there's always a mess to clean up with the mop on Wiki!).. anyway.. shoot me an email if you want to chat, or just go over a few things. Email This User on my talk page should reach me, and we can set up a discussion. Later man! SirFozzie 06:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Sir Fozzie, I hope we can work together, how should we start?--Vintagekits 18:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, first off, consider me a firewall for you. I'm gonna try to deflect folks off of disturbing you so you can edit productively.. and hopefully before you strike back at someone, you can at least run things by me, so they won't get you on personal attacks or civility With your permission, I'd like to put a statement at the top of your talk page that states.

This is a troll-free zone.

This editor has full permission to remove, without replying, any comments he feels are likely to inflame dispute. If you have a problem with this editor, you are invited to bring that concern to the attention of User:SirFozzie or another member of the administrator community, but please bear in mind that we have a zero-tolerance approach to harassment. Constructive dialogue is always welcome, but if your message is removed it is safe to assume that User:Vintagekits has read it and chooses not to debate with you at this time.

That way, if someone comes here and attempts to give you trouble, rather than engaging them and getting locked into a dispute, you can just delete it, and if they have problems, they can come see me.

Basically, my job as mentor is to keep folks off your back, and if you have any questions (on what action you should take, or what have you), to answer and try to keep things cool for ya. Anyway, that's a start. Let me know what you think. SirFozzie 19:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

You have my full backing to put that at the top of the page SF.--Vintagekits 19:24, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for being forceful but polite on that conversation, BTW. You can disagree (and I understood the move would be.. ahem.. contentious), but you don't drift into CIVIL/NPA areas. SirFozzie 21:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome Back

Welcome back.--padraig3uk 19:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Go raibh maith agat a chara.--Vintagekits 19:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Nice to see ye back. Regards --Domer48 21:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back, VK. --The.Q | Talk to me 11:17, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Cheers guys and if I can behave meself maybe I can last a wee bit longer eh!--Vintagekits 15:40, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Six Occupied Counties et al

Hello VK. I changed the redirect from Northern Ireland to Alternative names for Northern Ireland, since it is more informative to redirect to an article that describes an alternative name, rather than simply to the alternative name itself. Rockpocket 00:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

• grand.--Vintagekits 00:20, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Sir James M. Stronge, 9th Bart.

I don't want an edit war, this is sourced, by numerous times by reputable world authorities. If you or others dispute the baronetcy I suggest you write to Burkes and the SCB to clarify the situation. Then, if you can, somehow, source that he was never a baronet proper and ought never be known as bart. do what you may.--Counter-revolutionary 18:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

He is legally not a Baronet, that has been shown and the link that Padraig has provided confirms that he should not be referred to as a Baronet - the same goes for the 10th Baronet.--Vintagekits 18:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Martin Savage

Thanks for reverting that guy. I wondered if that wasn't the banner user (Rms, yes?) again. What a fucking nuisance. ---Theoldanarchist_Comhrá 03:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

• We refer to him as "our friend in New York" and yes he's a pain in the arse.--Vintagekits 12:10, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

RE:

I know that banned users have no rights, but can you please tell me to which user the IP belongs? —« ANIMUM » 14:48, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I left you a messege on the "protect page" article.--Vintagekits 14:48, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Oi II

I hear you're going for drinks with a common friend of ours Monday. Drink a couple for me, would ya? SirFozzie 07:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

It never worked out, two busy men eh!--Vintagekits 17:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Damn. Oh well, tommorrows a holiday in the US, that just means I'll have to catch up SirFozzie 17:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Why is something happening in the US tommorrow?--Vintagekits 17:40, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Independence day (we just call it the fourth of July), celebrating 331 years as a nation) SirFozzie 17:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I was just kiddin!! I'm a form resident of NYC and have enjoyed a few "Fourths".--Vintagekits 18:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

New York City? Ugh, PLEASE don't tell me you're a Yankees fan ;) SirFozzie 18:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Red Sox - and kinda a wee bit of the Mets. But in reality the sports ranks up there with cricket on my list of boring sports.--Vintagekits 18:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

heh. Ok.. as a Sox fan I was gonna get a mite bit upset with ya.. but a good answer. I'm a all-rounder when it comes to sports (actually follow rugby/soccer here) SirFozzie 18:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Well I got family in Southie and Dorchester hence the Boston link. I'm an all round sports fans also and give all sports a go, withon reason, baseball just never clicked.--Vintagekits 18:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Shoulda guessed about having family in Southie.. I live an hour outside Boston (if you look where the Mass /Rhode Island border stops going east west and starts going north south), it's that general area.

Got blood near Cranston RI also - we get everywhere eh!

Seán Mac Diarmada move

I'm sure you'll have noticed that I'm proposing to move Seán Mac Diarmada back to Seán MacDermott. Since you are the one who did the original move I reckon you deserve an explanation, especially since you weren't too impressed with the move from Easter Proclamation to Proclamation of the Irish Republic. Basically, the more I read about 1916 and related matters, the more I realise that what the priests taught us in school is not necessarily how it was. I feel very strongly that Clarke and MacDermott were airbrushed out of history in the '40s, '50s and '60s because they were IRB, and the IRB was a secret, oath-bound society and therefore anathema to Catholics. If they were referred to at all it was by the name that they signed on the Proclamation: Thomas J. Clarke and Seán Mac Diarmada. In fact, those two, far more than Pearse or anybody else, were the architects of the Rising, and therefore of the Ireland that we live in today. They deserve to be celebrated, and celebrated by the name by which they were known. That is all that's behind my proposed move. I hope that you will find my recent edits to Easter Rising an improvement. I have reason to believe that a mutual friend will be making further edits to that article in the near future. Scolaire 21:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Just cos we disagree doesnt mean I dont think you are a good editor Scolaire. Actually I think you will find that I wasnt opposed to the moving of the Proclamation. As for our Sean - its debatable and you have a strong case but I would go with the as gaelige version. slan.--Vintagekits 19:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

No, I knew you didn't oppose me on the Proclamation, but you said you felt its more commonly known as the "Easter Proclamation", so I was the more grateful for your support. I just kinda feel guilty about trying to change all the names that you are comfortable with. Anyhow, I hope we get a bit more input so whichever way it goes we will feel we have some sort of a consensus. Scolaire 23:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I do still think that Proclamation is more commonly known as the Easter Proclamation but I agreed with the change to avoid the confusion with the religious use of the term.--Vintagekits 08:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Good job

If he doesn't take action, I will. SirFozzie 16:33, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Cheers.--Vintagekits 16:35, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Incivility

Please stop refering to me as Weggie Kernel Saunters 11:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I was informed that you are Weggie - p.s. whats uncivil/incivil about it anyway?--Vintagekits 11:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Michael Gaughan (Irish republican)

I think it could be useful information. But the medical explanation wasn't sourced — the law article didn't say anything about that. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 22:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering what the source of him being a member of OIRA was as I have never come across this claim before.--padraig3uk 02:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I added the source ya dimwit - I was also quite surprised to read it myself and I didnt know it.--Vintagekits 02:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't see that, first I ever heard of it, I wonder did he switch sides in prison, as the OIRA were defunct in all but name by then.--padraig3uk 02:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd say he switched prior to the bank raid but I dont know, I would say OIRA via C na hE was his idological entry into republicanism but didnt do feck all for them in reality and then he move to PIRA and entered the war for real but thats all guesswork.--Vintagekits 02:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Possible, as that would explain why it is seldom or never mentioned.--padraig3uk 03:28, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Gibnews

Hi Vintagekits and thank you for your message. Can you find me the diff where he said that? The one you sent me was of him removing the warning. You have done the right thing in raising the matter with me. Not to be picky, but why do you call me Gunniog? That never was my user name and I've been User:John for quite a while now. Best wishes; I will help you if I can. --John 01:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I gave him a last warning; I'm sorry to see that wasn't enough for you but I bristle at the accusation of double standards. Blocks are preventive, not punitive and I always give people a last chance to stop poor behaviour before blocking. I hope you can rein in any tendency to be uncivil in complaining about a matter based around civility, as I'm sure you can see how silly that would be. Let me know, please, if Gibnews continues to make problematic edits. --John 02:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

If it wasnt for the other two final warnings that you have given give (one for NPA and one for edit warring) then I might have consiered this final warning more seriously. Second;y, the reference to double standards is with reference to your asertion that you would like to block him because you would "too close" - pity that wasnt the case for me and especially ONiH for whom you became the straw that broke the camels back. slainte!--Vintagekits 02:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I think you had quite a few final warnings from me yourself over a period. I only blocked you in the end after a discussion at WP:AN/I. I declined ONiH's unblock request because he was continuing to behave badly. I repeat, I always give people a chance to improve because I believe established editors deserve that, however problematic their behaviour. As I'm sure you know, Gibnews was blocked by Tyrenius, so the result you wanted was achieved. I'd like to see you as part of your improvement plan put all these grudges from the past behind you. You could achieve a lot more if you did. --John 03:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I've been to confusion (its wikis version of confession!) and Fr. O'Leary has absolved me of my sins so as far as I am concerned its a clean(ish) slate.--Vintagekits 03:21, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Your protection of Template:Northern Ireland infobox

Hi Tariqabjotu, I'm not sure that your protection of that template is all that useful. When I first separated the infobox out of the main article (Northern Ireland) as a single-transclusion template, the intent was to keep the main article unprotected for other non-infobox related edits, while the dispute on the infobox played out. However, since the main article is currently unprotected, editors are able to create their own versions of the infobox and put it in the main article, completely bypassing the protected template. This has already happened. My attempt at dispute resolution was a failure. I think the proper course of action is to reverse my work and put the infobox code back inline into the main article and protect that instead. Thanks, Andrwsc 21:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

That might work. Perhaps this should be presented to WP:ANI for more feedback, however. Padraig3uk (talk · contribs) appears to have been disruptive with flags in a lot of places. -- tariqabjotu 22:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Can I comment on this, firstly Andrwsc, you did created a seperate template to allow the Northern Ireland article to be unprotected, something I agreed with, and also something I did myself in the past if you care to check through the edit history over the past 6 months, on that occassion the template was nominated for deletion by another editor involved in the dispute on the flag issue.

The template you created this time you didn't protect when you created it, dispite being told it would need protection to prevent an edit war, you then allowed one editor to reinsert the flag, and carry out 7 reverts in a 48hr period, before you protected the template and give that editor a warning about edit warring dispite the fact they had broken 3RR and should have been blocked from editing, yet you failed to revert the template back to it original state.

There are a small group of editors trying to use WP as a soapbox to promote a particular political POV on Northern Ireland the flag issue is only part of that they are also pushing the notion that all Northern Ireland people are Northern Irish as a ethic group or nationality, this is completely false as people in Northern Ireland can either regard themselves as British, Irish or with duel British/Irish nationality, Northern Irish is a Unionist creation.

I believe that WP should present the facts of the political situation in Northern Ireland, in this the Official Flag is the Union Flag, not the Ulster Banner. I also have no objection to the use of the Ulster banner in its proper context, when dealing with the period of 1921-72, I even used the Ulster Banner in this Template:Politics of Northern Ireland 1921-72 template I created to deal with the government and elections of that period, nor do I object to its use when dealing with sports people that identify with that flag or play in the commonwealth games under that flag. But I do object with their attempts to protray the Ulster Banner as representing Northern Ireland and its government today or since 1972.--padraig3uk 02:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I would second that, Padraig has done more than most to resolve this issue, I would assert that it is the actions of Astrotrain (talk · contribs) that we need to be looking at as I believe the he creates the problems regarding this issue on many pages. --Vintagekits 02:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Padraig's creation of a second template to avoid the protection for Template:Northern Ireland infobox says enough. -- tariqabjotu 02:34, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

A second template in my opinion is very necessary and has been discussed for some time on the Northern Ireland talkpage - I again see this as a great effort on his behalf to resolve this issue. --Vintagekits 02:36, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I would like to see where that was discussed. -- tariqabjotu 02:38, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem, here is a good start and linked to threads either side.--Vintagekits 02:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

That thread has nothing to do with this template. -- tariqabjotu 02:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

It discusses creating the articles for which the Template:Politics of Northern Ireland 1921-72 would be used.--Vintagekits 03:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Vintagekits, we aren't discussing that template, but the infobox template I created to restore the Northern Ireland article back to the agree format before User:Setanta747 made his edits.--padraig3uk 03:31, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Michael Gaughan (Irish republican) II

Hello Vk. I was reading the above article that you have been contributing to and noted some serious issues with attributions. There are plenty of statements in this article that are written as facts, but when you read the sources they are most certainly not independent reliable sources. Just two examples:

• The funeral had embarrassed the anti-Republican Fine Gael/Labour coalition goverment in Ireland at the time and its then-Taoiseach, Liam Cosgrave is sourced to An Phoblacht. How on earth can the mouthpiece of one political party be an independent, reliable source of criticism of its opposition? This has to be attributed.

• Six to eight guards would restrain the prisoner and drag him or her by the hair to the top of the bed, where they would stretch the prisoner’s neck over the metal rail, force a block between his or her teeth and then pass a feeding tube, which extended down the throat, through a hole in the block, a description of the British method of forcefeeding, is sourced to NORAID. Again, this must be attributed, as the source is not independent.

Obviously, I could go ahead and do this myself, or bring it up on the talkpage. But I'm not really familiar with editing in this subject area, and first wanted to determine whether this sort of lack of attribution is the norm, and whether there would be protest about among the regulars. So I thought I would discuss it with your first.

Just to be clear, i'm not disputing the validity of this content, not am I saying that it is not accurate. I'm simply proposing that the content be attributed in the text, to make clear to the reader that this info is from sympathetic, rather than independent, sources. Rockpocket 08:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the email Rocket, we have a long(ish) standing agreement with what some might call "editors of another persuasion" that these sources are used especially, An Phoblacht, as it is the largest political weekly in Ireland and was one of the primary sources of news for the republican and nationalist communities is the O6 for many years. Anyway the basis of the agreement is that these sources are 1, used as fact unless there is a source which contradicts the informaton, then 2, if there is contrasiting then its is attributed and finally 3, if same information can be found from what other editors deem to be a more neutral source then the reference from say An Phoblacht, Troops Out Movement etc then the references from those sources is removed and replaced with the new source. regards--Vintagekits 12:28, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok. That seems fair enough. Thanks. Rockpocket 19:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

And just what "persuasion" are you labelling me with VK? ;-) This is one of the articles we could apply the rationale to, the referencing could definitely be improved. Its a pain in the arse doing it though, which is why I haven't yet. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 08:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey Vk. I wonder if you could shed any light on some issues about Gaughan. Do you know if his conviction was on terrorist-related charges or just criminal charges (and by that I mean explicitly, obviously the motivations of the prosecution may have been political, even if the charges were explicitly criminal). Secondly, it appears from his hunger strike demands that he was never awarded special status, can this be confirmed? Rockpocket 18:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

To answer 1. I dont know is the answer as for 2. he may have had it at the very beginning of his internment but definately didnt at the end.--Vintagekits 19:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Michael Gaughan

Thanks for your message. Two points: Firstly I have indeed read WP:RS, and Noraid is a textbook example of a questionable source. To quote: 'A questionable source is one with no independent editorial oversight or fact-checking process, or with a poor reputation for fact-checking. This includes websites and publications that express political, religious, anti-religious, or racist views that are widely acknowledged as extremist.' Noraid is therefore fine as a source for Republican perceptions of Michael Gaughan, but as a source for a NPOV description of British force-feeding methods, or the political impact of the hunger-strikers it is entirely useless, being about as partisan and unbalanced as it is possible for a source to be.

Second point: I am concerned about the use of the term 'Volunteer' for IRA members on Wikipedia. To me this seems to be favouring the IRA POV (that they are a legitimate army and therefore entitled to be addressed by their ranks) over the British POV (that they are criminals/terrorists). The neutral description would seem to me to be 'members'. I'm guessing that this has come up before: is there any discussion or guideline that you could point me to? Thanks.--86.31.225.153 22:01, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

1, Have you got any proof that the Noraid article has a. "no independent editorial oversight" b. "no fact-checking process" or c. "a poor reputation for fact-checking." - actually if you read the articles on their website that totally debunks that issue. 2. If you read the article Volunteer (Irish republican) you will understand that its a rank. If consider members of the British Army to be terrorist, murderer or criminals (which many people do) would that negate that fact that they held a rank in that organisation no matter how lowly they would consider that organisation or rank?--Vintagekits 22:02, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

1)Noraid claims on the front page of its website to be 'the voice of Irish Republicanism in America'. Nothing wrong with that - but it clearly means it is partisan on the subject of Irish Republicanism. Its entire purpose is to support the Irish Republican POV, not to be a neutral conduit of balanced information about Ireland. It does not claim to be independent in the way that the New York Times or the Sydney Daily Telegraph would claim to be when writing about Ireland. This does not mean that everything in it is POV or incorrect, just that we cannot rely on anything in it to be NPOV. 2) The difference between the British Army and the IRA for Wikipedia purposes is that the British Army is, de facto and de jure, the army of an internationally-recognised state with control over its territory, recognition from its neighbours and the UN, and subject to international law. None of this applies to the IRA, which is only recognised as an army by its supporters. This is true even if you consider members of the British army to be criminals and murderers - they are, objectively, an army in the legal sense: it is this that entitles them to be known by their ranks.--86.31.225.153 22:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

1. Neutrality is a quality that is in scarce supply with regards the issue of NI, and to claim that a Unionist paper like that Daily Telegraph is a paragon of neutrality speaks volumes to me. Also neutrality does not preclude a source from being reliable per WP:RS. 2. The point I was making is that like it or not that the IRA has systems, ranks as well as anArmy Council, Chief of Staff, Quartermaster General,Divisions, Brigades [12] [13], North and South Command etc in its organisation - it exists we all have to deal with it.--Vintagekits 22:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Names.

Thanks. Was just about to leave you a message saying well done with the work you've done to the Vol. Michael Gaughan article. Keep up the good work. Derry Boi 20:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Cheers a chara, Vol. Frank Stagg is next up.--Vintagekits 20:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I added some info the Frank Stagg article earlier, also sorted the sources on Special Category Status and removed the tag.--padraig3uk 10:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Cool.--Vintagekits 10:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Dia duit

Go raibh maith agat a chara, conas tá tú inniu? Scalpfarmer 10:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Ta me go mhaith - failte romhat i do cumann a chara.--Vintagekits 10:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Sláinte chugat. Cárb as duit? Is as Dún Dealgan mé. Scalpfarmer 10:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Prisoner of war category

I'm not sure this category is appropriate. It should probably be discussed before being inserted into all IRA articles. I'll maybe start a conversation at the WP:IWNB. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 10:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll stop for now. Crack on with the discussion.--Vintagekits 10:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Started it at the IWNB. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 10:51, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Tom William's

Hello Vintagekits, could you look over my edits? Seen it on the project page as needing work. Regards--Domer48 20:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

That Article

[14] has it. Let me know when you feel it's ready for prime time, and I'll undelete the article SirFozzie 23:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Mairéad Farrell

As I already explained to you, Member/Volunteer is not an option. Please revert. --John 00:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I've explained to you the ruling of the mediation cabal. Now if you want to start a new mediation cabal then crack on but your not going to bully me.--Vintagekits 01:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Can't see anything there that justifies your position. Tell you what, I'm getting tired of your incivility as well. --John 01:10, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

You keep shouting about incivility - I havent been uncivil - just because you dont like the point I am putting across doesnt mean I am being uncivil.--Vintagekits 01:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi again Vintagekits. Can you please explain how the ruling justifies always capitalising the word "volunteer"? According to our MoS this is wrong. I'm looking at the sentence "Lower case "v" should be used for the time being." Thanks in advance. --John 18:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

No a lower case v wont be used in the mean time - read the mediation cabal ruling and then read the article talk page.--Vintagekits 18:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I was quoting from the cabal ruling. I already quoted you the MoS section. I have lots of patience but it isn't infinite. --John 18:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey VK.. just step it down a bit man. I just noticed this on my last go round on WP before tying to catch 120 winks or so (got a killer bug and currently feeling like a steamroller ran over me..) Let me read the section and see what's going on and we can see where we need to go on it. SirFozzie 18:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

No probs Fozz. The cabal stated that the capitalisation of Volunteer should be further discussed on the talk page, it was then agreed that it was to be capitalised. P.S. hope you get better soon mate--Vintagekits 18:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

VK, this is what I'm seeing. Remember two things, A) That I'm looking over this quickly, and B) I'm not as sharp as I normally am, anyway. I'm gonna have to agree that John looks correct so far. I'll provide my reasoning in a new section below. Remember, I don't have the experience that you guys have with this whole thing (read a good article on sports as it pertains to the situation, I should send you the link someday when I can find it again.) SirFozzie 18:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Clinton Picture

You might want to back that up with some evidence.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fermanagheditor (talk • contribs)

I am asking you a question. also - please sign your comments.--Vintagekits 01:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I dont know anything about signing comments as im new to wikipedia and I wont be signing this comment.

I see you have got yourself a bit of a negative reputation here on wikipedia thus my reason for deciding to ignore and delete any future comments from you.

P.S wikipedia should be respected. Its been very benefical for me and I and im sure many other users would appreciate a bit of respect from you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fermanagheditor (talk • contribs)

So despite banging on about WP:AGF you are blatantly failing to adhere to this and also convieniantly ignoring the issue of copyright violation - interesting.--Vintagekits 01:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I have uploaded the pictures under 'my own work' and have stted on ALL pictures that i took he myself so is there any point in e answering any queston when the answer is on the image ta? --Fermanagheditor 03:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

still no very civil but at least you are signing your posts so thats something.--Vintagekits 02:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

This new user uploaded a bunch of images and tagged them as his own work. Unless you actually have evidence that he did not take this pictures, you MUST assume good faith. Why? If he's going to lie about it the first time, he'll lie about it the second time, too. Therefore, asking for a "confirmation" is a waste of time (if he's not being truthful) and rude (if he is being truthful). Now I know you don't want to spend your days wasting your time or being rude - so your best bet is to think of something else to do - like finding outside evidence that the images are copyvios - or complimenting the new user on his helpful contributions. Rklawton 02:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Two points - 1. I did say he did I asked him to confim if he did take the shots, 2. an admin has deleted the pics cos he obviously had doubts about them. I did assume good faith but as you can see if you look through the editors recents edits that he is acting a little irrationally!--Vintagekits 02:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

My reading of the MedCab case

Consensus on IRA member and volunteer

Where the initial definition occurs in the lead section, it should firstly be stated that a person is a member of the IRA. The term volunteer should then normally be mentioned. Lower case "v" should be used for the time being. In the main text of an article the word, volunteer, is free to be used, but this has to be judged in each particular instance to achieve maximum sense and good style. It should not be used rigidly and other terms such as "IRA member" can also be used or any other appropriate reference. Different terms can be interspersed, and may vary from article to article.

(Signed agree) Vintagekits 17:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't see anything after that that would indicate disagreement with the MedCab results. And I tried to look for it, man. Hope you take this in the spirit offered, and to see where the other side is coming from. Off to bed, then.... SirFozzie 18:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

here mate, the reason that I agreed to the cabal resolution was that this issue was to be discussed further. The two main protagonists on either side were myself and Logistic and both of us agreed that it was to be a capital V.--Vintagekits 18:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Your individual agreement with another user, while meritorious in a way, does not for a moment override the MedCab decision or Wikipedia's Manual of Style. I can't think why you would believe that it could. If you look one section down on the talk page you refer to you can see a reasonable summary of the position from Tyrenius. Please make sure you adhere to it in future. Thanks. --John 19:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense, ask Tyrenius, he was the one that stated that we should agree that between us what the issue of the capitalisation should be. YOU ADHERE TO IT!--Vintagekits 19:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Can you show me where Tyrenius gave you and another user permission to decide consensus between yourselves on a usage that contradicted both MedCab and MoS? No offence, but I find that very hard to beleive. --John 19:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Why dont you post a messege on his talk page if you require clarification. I feel like I may become uncivil relatively soon, so I am going to disengage.--Vintagekits 19:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

(deindent) That's fine. I don't think I am getting anywhere in discussing your behaviour with you directly so I intend to take it up with SirFozzie as you are supposed to be on parole. Best wishes, --John 19:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

No one has had a problem with me -except you, and shocking you were the one that blocked me - you are bullying me, you have done for some time and I am pretty sick of it. What you want me to do is bow down you whatever you say at every turn and if I dont you say I have been uncivil - which I havent. I would actually appricate if you never posted on this talk page again and stayed away from me as you seem to be the main root of the trouble that ever comes my way. I mean all this in the strictest wiki sense. regards--Vintagekits 19:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Advice

Hello Vk. I'm going to offer a bit of unsolicited advice here, which you are entirely free to ignore, of course, but I hope you will at leat think about it. I wonder if you ever consider why you seem to find yourself almost perpetually in conflict with other editors? Of course, you certainly edit in controversial areas, and that is obviously part of it, but there is more to it that that. I edit on controversial areas all the time, but generally get on pretty well with most other editors.

Consider an editor makes a few comments about something that are perfectly civil and appropriate [15], immediately you strike an aggressive an accusatory tone [16], report the editor as a sock to an admin [17] with no good evidence whatsoever. For some strange reason SirFozzie appeared to have taken your assumption as Gospel and indef blocked this user on the most flimsy of circumstantial evidence. This is the most egregious failure of WP:AGF, starting a chain reaction leading to a terribly unjustified block. This would be bad enough, but when it eventually gets sorted out and the blocked editor - perfectly civilly - notes your role in this mess [18], you don't apologise, nor to you even acknowledge your actions. What you do is delete the comment with a rather incivil "be gone". [19]

My point is that to be a successful Wikipedian, we have to address other editors with a basic level of respect and civility, whether they agree with you on any specific issue or not. This editor afforded you that respect and in response you have treated him very poorly indeed. This is a perfect example of why you meet conflict at every turn here. I don't know the reason for it, whether it is just your attitude towards the purpose of the project, or whether you don't see a problem with it, but this sort of constant borderline incivility is problematic. Each comment or act in itself may seem insignificant, but it appears to be continual and the sheer weight of conflict is a huge energy sink for those editors drawn into it. In the past you have argued you are simply responding to what you see as incitement from other editors (cf. John in the section above), but I can't find a single incivil word or act from Hegertor (talk · contribs) to justify this response (apart from the fact you are convinced he is a sock of someone you had a run in with in the past).

So, my request to you is twofold. Firstly please seriously consider WP:AGF and use it. Sockpuppetry and meatpuppetry is always outed in the end (as you are painfully aware), so there is no need to act on rash accusations without proof. Secondly, can't you just be a bit nicer to people? Would it make you less of a man to respond to to Hegertor's reminder with, "thank you for your comments, they are duly noted", then delete it (as is your right)? Because your perpetually anatagonistic tone is counterproductive to both you and the project and it will only be tolerated for so long. Thanks for your consideration. Rockpocket 18:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Rather one sided view but I that your point. If you had to dealing with the literally 100's of socks of RMS then you would understand - obviously Sir Fozzie thought the same and he did unblock him but still had concerns over the account. I still believe Hegator is a sock if not of RMS then of someone else - all you need to do is read his first three edits and if that doesnt convince you then I dont know. Additionally how come I've never had any conflict with anyone over any of my boxing articles? strange that! Anyway point taken. --Vintagekits 18:30, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually I have my own pet banned troll that has, literally, hundreds of socks (see here and here), so I know exactly what it is like. Some have taken a while to confirm though, because its really important not to block unless you are convinced. Blocks are not punitive, therefore there is no good reason to block if there is no immediate threat to Wikipedia, or you are convinced it is a banned/blocked user.

Remember it is not against policy to have a number of accounts, nor is it against policy for an experienced editor to disappear and reappear under a new account. In fact I'm reasonably sure an erstwhile colleague of yours who left recently has done exactly that, but that is his right to remain anonymous. So whether Hegertor has edited previously is not really an issue, even if he is a previously blocked editor, so long as he edits constructively and civilly now, is it really a problem? If Hegertor is some persistent troll, then his true colours will be revealed in time and he will be dealt with. In the meantime, this is where WP:AGF comes in.

Anyway, thanks for considering my comments in the manner they are meant. Rockpocket 05:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: NI Infobox Template

Why is the template saying the Union Flag is the official flag and then not including it? I've replied to your comments about the FAI League of Ireland on my talk page. Regards. -MichiganCharms 21:44, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Because its not the flag of Northern Ireland, if you are interested in contributing to the discussion with regards this topic please for to the talk page of the Northern Ireland article.--Vintagekits 21:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Boxing

Clearchoice here - Thanks for the welcome. I'm an ex-boxer myself...interesting pages you've put up. I'm no expert on Wikipedia so thanks for your offer of assistance!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Clearchoice (talk • contribs)

No prolem mate, if you need any help or guidance just just me a shout.--Vintagekits 11:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)--Vintagekits 11:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

NPA

Vk. This is unacceptable. You need to WP:COOL off now and take a break. If you repeat this sort of language I will block you per the terms of your probation. Please chill and come back when you can discuss matters without resorting to personal attacks. You will not be warned again. Rockpocket 21:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)