Jump to content

User talk:Scolaire: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
GDD1000
→‎GDD1000: mytake on it
Line 1,611: Line 1,611:
==GDD1000==
==GDD1000==
My take on the whole situation. To be honest I think you're being slightly hard on Domer and Dunc. Regardless of what they (and others) did, he really didn't help himself. You know as well as anyone the problems he had with self published sources, you were even involved in at least one discussion about them. Time after time he was told, and yet there's still edits like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=7th_Queen%27s_Own_Hussars&diff=214911306&oldid=214910902 this use of a self published source], and there's plenty more where that came from. I had no real dog in this battle other than neutrality, sadly most people didn't get that because of the inherent systematic bias with the "IRA are murdering terrorist bastards" opinionated editors (ie, anyone who reads ''The Sun'' for starters) being in the majority meant that the articles were similarly slanted so most of the POV removing only went in one direction. Now I was here long enough to recognise POV editing when I see it, and I see plenty of it in GDD1000's editing. For example an uninvolved third party (you know, the ones GDD1000 supposedly listened to?) [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Remembrance_Day_bombing&diff=215154841&oldid=213686547 removed unsourced POV commentary], which was clearly a good edit. So what did GDD1000 do? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Remembrance_Day_bombing&curid=1956575&diff=215167400&oldid=215154841 Reverted], and suggested the page be protected. That's an indefensible edit by anyone's standards. Now we'll moved onto his editing of [[The Troubles]], and there's plenty of dodgy editing went on there. However the best example is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Troubles&diff=215171032&oldid=215170629 this edit] where he "Removed commentary". Now commentary or not, the perspective that the Republican Movement saw the level of support during the hunger strike as a "potential for political and electoral strategy" is indisputably true and easily sourced, the addition of {{tl|cn}} would have solved that rapidly. However it was quickly removed, which on its own isn't a major problem. But he neglects to remove the Unionist perspective despite it being unsourced and commentary, and he definitely knew it was there because he edited the sentence. Tag both perspectives for sources? No problem. Remove both perspectives? No problem. Leave both unsourced perspectives in the article? Not ideal, but no problem. Remove one and not the other? POV editing, and the sort we can do without. So while it's easy to paint him as the victim of the piece, it's just as easy to paint him as a POV pusher who just didn't get the way Wikipedia works despite it being explained time and again. In my opinion he made no real effort to conform to Wikipedia expecting it instead to conform to him, and as recent events have shown it's play by our rules, or don't play at all.... <font face="Verdana">[[User:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">One Night In Hackney</span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">303</span>]]''</sub></font> 16:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
My take on the whole situation. To be honest I think you're being slightly hard on Domer and Dunc. Regardless of what they (and others) did, he really didn't help himself. You know as well as anyone the problems he had with self published sources, you were even involved in at least one discussion about them. Time after time he was told, and yet there's still edits like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=7th_Queen%27s_Own_Hussars&diff=214911306&oldid=214910902 this use of a self published source], and there's plenty more where that came from. I had no real dog in this battle other than neutrality, sadly most people didn't get that because of the inherent systematic bias with the "IRA are murdering terrorist bastards" opinionated editors (ie, anyone who reads ''The Sun'' for starters) being in the majority meant that the articles were similarly slanted so most of the POV removing only went in one direction. Now I was here long enough to recognise POV editing when I see it, and I see plenty of it in GDD1000's editing. For example an uninvolved third party (you know, the ones GDD1000 supposedly listened to?) [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Remembrance_Day_bombing&diff=215154841&oldid=213686547 removed unsourced POV commentary], which was clearly a good edit. So what did GDD1000 do? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Remembrance_Day_bombing&curid=1956575&diff=215167400&oldid=215154841 Reverted], and suggested the page be protected. That's an indefensible edit by anyone's standards. Now we'll moved onto his editing of [[The Troubles]], and there's plenty of dodgy editing went on there. However the best example is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Troubles&diff=215171032&oldid=215170629 this edit] where he "Removed commentary". Now commentary or not, the perspective that the Republican Movement saw the level of support during the hunger strike as a "potential for political and electoral strategy" is indisputably true and easily sourced, the addition of {{tl|cn}} would have solved that rapidly. However it was quickly removed, which on its own isn't a major problem. But he neglects to remove the Unionist perspective despite it being unsourced and commentary, and he definitely knew it was there because he edited the sentence. Tag both perspectives for sources? No problem. Remove both perspectives? No problem. Leave both unsourced perspectives in the article? Not ideal, but no problem. Remove one and not the other? POV editing, and the sort we can do without. So while it's easy to paint him as the victim of the piece, it's just as easy to paint him as a POV pusher who just didn't get the way Wikipedia works despite it being explained time and again. In my opinion he made no real effort to conform to Wikipedia expecting it instead to conform to him, and as recent events have shown it's play by our rules, or don't play at all.... <font face="Verdana">[[User:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">One Night In Hackney</span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">303</span>]]''</sub></font> 16:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

:There is one thing I can be criticised for: I didn't say, and I should have, that that guy had ''major'' problems with adhering to consensus, that he dug his own grave time and time and time again, and that I opted out of the article as soon as I decently could because he was driving me mental! But that's all beside the point. I was involved in far more than one discussion with him. I was talking to him on his talk page as well as the article talk page. As I do when I'm trying to work through a problem, I was engaging in dialogue with him. And it was maddening beyond belief to have that dialogue interrupted over and over by shouts of "OR", "reliable sources" etc. etc.! Each time I thought he might be about to take something on board, the two of them goaded him again for no other apparent reason than the sheer sport of it. Even if your adversary is the worst POV-pusher on the wiki (and GDD would certainly be in the finals) the use of those tactics (Domers famous quote in another context of "I know how to handle that gobshite") is disruptive not just to the editor but to the article and the talk-page themselves. And here's a question: GDD walked away from WP - a golden opportunity to correct all the POV slants in the UDR article without opposition! So why did editing on the article stop dead the day he left? I can't help asking, how much of it was desire to produce a good article and how much was just the thrill of battle? And isn't it great when another editor on another article starts adding outrageous POV-ridden material like "infamous coffin-ship" so you can go out and die for your country again? That's my take on it. [[User:Scolaire|Scolaire]] ([[User talk:Scolaire#top|talk]]) 17:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:50, 27 June 2008

Welcome!

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

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

Djegan 17:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aire

The problem with translating "Príomh Aire" ad "Prime Minister" is that it implies "the first Minister to the Head of State - specifically to the King. But there was no King. In this context, the translation is not correct. --Red King 07:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just for info, FearÉireann explains on my talk page that his reversion of your edit without explanation was a cock-up, not a conspiracy. --Red King 18:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cathal Bruges

Just a note, sorry to take so long to respond to your thoughtful comment. Cheers V. Joe 22:21, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Family Way

Kingboyk, thanks for contributing to my article. I'm a fairly new member and this is the fiirst time that somebody has contributed to an article while I'm still working on it. Makes me feel I'm doing something worthwhile :-)
Scolaire 16:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and indeed welcome to the Beatles WikiProject. Good to have you aboard! :) If you need any help just let me know, or ask on our Project talk page. --kingboyk 17:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 3, July 2006

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 003 – July 2006

Beatles News
Project News
  • New article classification system, for our use and for Wikipedia 1.0. Very important and we need editor involvement. How can you help? Rate articles! It's easy:
    • Visit Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles/Article Classification and read about how to grade.
    • Visit Category:Unassessed Beatles articles and select an article to review.
    • After deciding what grade it should have, modify the invocation of {{WPBeatles}} on the talk page to add parms. The template itself gives you the parameters to use. For example, change {{WPBeatles}} to {{WPBeatles|B|Low}} if you think it's a low-importance, B-class article. Save your changes and make sure the talk page is now showing the ratings.
    • Click on the link in the template to edit the /comments subpage and explain why you rated the article the way you did. Don't forget to sign with ~~~~. Save that too.
    • Questions? Ask Kingboyk or Lar for help.
  • Want to stay up on new project developments? Watchlist all of the WikiProject pages plus The Beatles and each of the 4 members, to get a feel for what's happening. Also monitor and regularly review Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/The Beatles articles by quality log. If an article is listed on there as "added", go check the article's history. If it's new since the Project began add it to the Project Log as a new article and up the counter by one :)
Member News
Issue of the Month

Preparing articles for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.

From the Editors

It was a bit of a struggle to get this month's newsletter done, as we did it without a lead editor. Hopefully, next month you'll jump in and be our lead editor. Big news is that WP:1.0 is coming along nicely and our article classification system has changed to conform to it.

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 004 – August 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Meyer Prinstein

Thanks for creating that article. That proves I was quite right when I told someone today that removing red links encourages editors to create the articles, not the other way 'round. :) Mad Jack 22:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jack. Actually the article has been around for a while, but entitled "Meyer Prinstein". All I did in this case was fix the link. Scolaire 22:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh... well, thanks anyway! Mad Jack 22:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 4, August 2006

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 004 – August 2006

Issue of the Month

Despite it being the lead news article of last month, there is still help required in the assessing of articles and the migrating of comments. Lar is willing to provide assistance to those unsure how to do this.

Beatles News
  • The Beatles in the news. Suggestions: [2] [3]
Project News
  • The Beatles article, the "Flagship" of the Project, is currently under review with regard to its Featured Article status. It is hoped that the review will identify those areas that need some(/lots of) remedial work, and that the Project participants and those editors who are involved in the the FA admin pages to can work together to "save" the status of the article.
    • At the moment there is some discussion as to why it has been listed, and what may be needed to help it retain its FA status. It may well be that some work is going to be required in formulating a plan of action, and then some more in achieving those aims.
    • The FA status is obviously quite important to the Project, and it would be appreciated if participants are able to provide assistance in keeping the article up to standard. The editors would be grateful if those persons receiving this Newsletter could spare some of their time, energy and brainpower in keeping this jewel in our crown in its proper place. Please go to Wikipedia:Featured article review/The Beatles and get involved! Thank you.
Notable updates
Member News
From the Editors

As mentioned in the Project News section, The Beatles article has just been listed for a review of its Featured Article status. Working on this is quite important.

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 005 – September 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Infobox

Apologies. I was trying to fix the page with the template when my crappy internet link went down. Where an infobox affects the location of images, the standard solution applied all over WP is simple: change the image placement from right to left (or vice versa if the box is on the left). Because of the nature of the template a reader should be able to link into a lot more than just the piece you left here. I think it is important that people can use the whole template to get access to all the information. The box is designed as a form of crossroads from which a reader can go to everything from political topics to biographies to artistic aspects to links to other strands in Irish history, whether Unionism, Monarchism, etc. So readers should be able in one straight link, for example, to go from here to songs about the Rising (we need some articles about them), or to Sinn Féin, or by jumping to the forthcoming Nationalist template to the IIP, etc etc. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 22:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is one of the major benefits of using these boxes rather than categories. Some months ago, as one of the editing team pulling together articles on monarchy on WP I created a template on crowns and crown jewels. At the start probably only about 15 of the 40 or so links to famous crowns were written up. Within a couple of weeks users from all around the world had been spurred on to add in articles on the Iranian Crown Jewels or the Louis XV crown, or the Crown of Mexico, etc. So the template generated those articles, whereas a category list never could, as you need to have a category to have an article link to start off with.

One of the reasons I created this big template is to encourage editors to contribute to those articles already there. I remember as a schoolkid learning The Bold Fenian Men and various other republican songs. (I remember once song from the 1970s: Rubber Bullets for the Ladies!) I am working on a template on Irish monarchism. While doing it I remembered Griffith's proposal for an Anglo-Irish Empire. I'd completely forgotten that. So these templates, especially big ones, whether the republican one or the crowns one, can act as a major spur to having gaps filled in. Over time the template can then be narrowed and focused down but right now it is big to get the ball rolling on ideas and topics that people might not have thought about contributing to until they saw the link. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 23:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Scoláire

Hiya Scoláire. 'I left off the á from my user name just because it's a pain to type in every time I log on.' I just came over to your page from the comment on the Talk:British Isles (terminology) page and saw this. It shouldn't be any trouble at all to get the fadaí. Hold down the 'alt' 'ctrl' and vowel simultaneously and you have them in small letters very quickly: áéíóú. Simple. Hold down the 'alt', 'ctrl', vowel and 'shift' keys to get the fadaí in caps: ÁÉÍÓÚ. Bail ó Dhia. El Gringo 22:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gringo. I did actually know about the alt key (I usually use alt-160 for á etc.). By 'a pain to type in' I just meant I haven't the patience to spend the extra 1.3 seconds holding the alt key :P I love your user page, though. a poem about me! And in a fabulous Gaelic font. Did you know you can get séimhiú's on most of those fonts as well, for the real ancient feel (we still had séimhiú's when I was at school)? Scolaire 06:46, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aris

Jonto is back again on British Isles doing his usual antics. Yippee. *sigh* Keep an eye out. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 17:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

W.T. Cosgrave

Hi, Peter I think you are mistaken on W.T. Cosgrave. One of the strange quirks of the English language seems to be that where someone is known by a number of initials, and the first name is initialised rather than spelt out, the set of initials are written in one of three formats: (1) bunched together; (2) written with a space between each but no period; or (3) written with periods but no spaces between them. So one writes FDR, F D R or F.D.R. but not F. D. R.; JFK, J F K or J.F.K. but not J. F. K.; PW Botha, P W Botha or P.W. Botha, but not P. W. Botha. Similarly here one writes either WT Cosgrave, W T Cosgrave or W.T. Cosgrave. One doesn't write W. T. Cosgrave however. (I did write W. T. Cosgrave in a college essay once and had it marked as wrong!) English is full of these quirks. Often they aren't even formally defined. They just develop. This article is correctly laid out. W. T. Cosgrave would be incorrect, and also look very strange.

BTW Thanks for the comments on the IrishR template. Sorry if I sounded grouchy earlier when talking about it. Having a bad cold, a migraine, etc does that to me. I am happy with how the boxes are progressing. I just have to do a Unionist box now. They all are still being tweaked to get the overall concept right, but I think they are a useful addition. All too often when we think about a political concept we forget its cultural resonances also. That is why I was so insistent on the cultural bits staying in. Songs and stories play a significant part on shaping a movement or ideals. I think it is a pity that say the {{Socialism}} box ignores the cultural aspects and focuses exclusively on the hard political. Anyway, I've done three boxes, on Irish Republicanism, Irish Nationalism and Irish Monarchism. All that remains is Irish Unionism. Putting in links to each on each other's templates allows users to jump between the templates, which I think will be very useful in allowing someone who is reading about one aspect of Irish political history to jump to a completely different strand and see the key aspects there. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 00:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


"F D R" or "J F K" looks seriously creepy! ;-) Otherwise, I take your point. It might be a point worth making at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people)#Middle names - abbreviations of names.
Scolaire 20:35, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having written that, I now discover it has been discussed at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#Proposal on spacing of initials in names.
Scolaire 20:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested in a RM going on at talk:Prime minister (sic). Some individuals moved the page to that ridiculous half uppercase half lowercase name (if it stays at that form WP will be a laughing stock!) Feel free to contribute to the debate if you wish. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 23:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 5, September 2006

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 005 – September 2006

Beatles News
Project News
  • Unfortunately, the Featured Article badge on The Beatles was revoked. The article was immediately nominated for Good Article status, which it received later that same day. Project member Kingboyk said of the nomination, "I'm quite happy about it really, as I feel that GA is about where we're at and gives some incentive to work on the article."
  • We have a new category for Beatles articles needing attention. If you're looking for something to work on, the articles in this category and the subcategories need some TLC. To put an article in this category, tag its talk page with {{WPBeatles|attention=yes}}.
  • Kingboyk has given {{WPBeatles}} another major overhaul, and has assessed all of the Beatles articles. He would be grateful if other editors would leave comments on the state of articles, needed improvements and so on, by clicking the Comments link in the template. Also, feel free to revise the gradings—the assessments were done quickly, and article quality can change.
Member News
  • Liverpool Scouse has offered to take any desired pictures of the Liverpool area, upon request.
Issue of the Month

The featured article status of The Beatles was revoked.

From the Editors

A month of slow progress and some amazing efforts. Still need help getting comments shifted. Don't forget to log your accomplishments!

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 006 – October 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

1916 Rising

I'm afraid your mistaken in your "infobox" The IRB wre combatants of the war and it is stated by The 1916 provisional Government in 1916 Proclamation. I don't know if you are aware of thid document but it is very interesting in its reference to The IRB; "having organised and trained her manhood through her secret revolutionary organisation The Irish Republican Brotherhood...she strikes in full confidence of victory. This is a pretty clear banner and indication that they were combatants.

I am well aware of the role of the IRB in the Rising, and the acknowlegement of them in the Proclamation. What I'm saying is that the IRB planned the Rising, and a planner is not a combatant. The combatants were the soldiers (i.e. Volunteers and Citizen Army) who fought on behalf of the IRB, if you like. Thus, George W. Bush is not a combatant in the Iraq War, neither is the American Government, or American oil interests — only the American military (and its allies) are combatants. This is not to diminish the role of the IRB in the Rising, just to define it precisely.
Scolaire 18:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 6, October 2006

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 006 – October 2006

Beatles News
  • The site of the former Casbah Club, operated by Mona Best (mother of Pete) in the basement of her house, and where the nascent Beatles played and rehearsed, has been accorded Grade II Listed status following a recommendation by British Heritage.
Project News
  • Some Project articles are having their Featured Article status reviewed, and the comments are not encouraging. The articles are A Day in the Life and A Hard Day's Night (song). (She Loves You has already had its FA status revoked.) Please participate in the discussion and help improve the articles!
Member News
  • As usual, the self-effacing individuals who contribute to the Project are far too modest to mention any Barnstars or other awards they may have received. Obviously they feel their editing/contributing is reward enough.
Issue of the Month

The lead article of the Project recently lost its FA status, and now some of the other articles are being reviewed. Citations and references within articles are again the major concern. Contributors who have literature (books, magazines, links, etc.) are especially needed to provide the necessary citations. It is not enough for editors to know the facts; they need to be backed up by other sources. All help, both within the articles and the discussion, would be appreciated.

From the Editors

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 007 – November 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Come back, Kingboyk! The children miss you!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

The Family Way

Hi Scolaire, I noticed that by Beatles Project the article has been set to Start, but in Film Project terms it still has to go some way. I am contributing to lists of films and when I meet a stub without a template, I add one. It helps with sorting and developing film articles. It's not an assessment tag, like the one in the talk page. Just helps film gnomes do their thing. If you see a reason it should not be there, please give me an idea why. It may help me improve my contributions in stub templates. Hoverfish 11:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 7, November 2006

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 007 – November 2006

Issue of the Month

Again, the issue of the month is inline citations. A Day in the Life, A Hard Day's Night (song), and Get Back have all been defeatured, as they failed to satisfy criterion 1(c) of What is a featured article?, and other song FAs are due for the chopping block. Inline citations are an important aspect of articles—they ensure verifiability and reliability, and they remove original research. Additionally, they give readers the option to read the original source material and view it within context.

Basically:

  1. All direct quotations attributed to Beatles members pooled from interviews need full inline citations.
  2. All critical comments about songs or albums need full inline citations to notable music critics, magazines opinions, or reviews, as opposed to being merely comments by Wikipedians.
  3. Inline citations need: author name, article name, publication date, and name of publication. Such info is still preferable even if quoting from an interview posted upon a website; when this is the case, place the URL link at the end of the citation with the date it was last accessed. (This will help editors retrieve the page using the Wayback Machine, should the link go dead in the future.)
Beatles News
  • The Beatles are due to release a soundtrack album, LOVE, at the end of November, as a companion to their Cirque du Soleil adaptation of the same name. It will feature remastered and remixed versions of their previously released songs, including some new medleys.
  • Paul's getting a divorce. Pain, arguing, and fighting abound.
Project News
  • The Wings tours are really nicely documented now (see Category:Wings tours), but Category:The Beatles tours is almost empty. Kingboyk and the rest of us would love to see (and read) articles on each Beatles tour, including the pre-fame tours of the UK—and the Hamburg trips, of course!
  • The hottest Project page this month has been Paul McCartney, involved in the Featured Article drive, as mentioned above.
Member News
  • Our project members are too modest to report any awards they may have given or received.
From the Editors

Wherever possible, editors should help to trim down on list-like prose within Beatles articles. They should convert list-like sections into fluent, cohesive prose which ties an article's sections together. Lists make articles disjointed, awkward, and difficult to read.

Be sure to take part in the Featured Article drive, and don't forget those inline citations!

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 008 – December 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Duke of Normandy

Salutations. I've no objections to the recent changes you made to my work on the Duke of Normandy article. I'm glad whenever I discover that someone has read my work and deemed it decent enough to make only minor alterations. Rather, I have a specific question: Do Wikipedia guidelines indicate that one should avoid links in title lines? If so I am eager to follow this model in the future.

Another minor question: I noticed you just made an edit to the relatively obscure article on Milo O'Shea. I edited that article yesterday as well. Were you wandering in my contribution tracks (I do that to others sometimes, although no one has ever mentioned that they noticed me) or is that just coincidence?

Best wishes.

HouseOfScandal 13:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter Issue 8, December 2006

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 008 – December 2006

Issue of the Month

Wikipedia's standards are improving all the time, with the result that many articles in The Beatles Wikiproject are being nominated for review of their FA and GA status - and many are losing that accolade. It is difficult, with such a large number of articles and the ease with which editors may make changes which are detrimental, to maintain the standard of articles, let alone improve them. As ever, members efforts are both appreciated and needed to keep the Project on course.

Beatles News
  • A Beatles compilation called "Love", featuring tracks remastered by George Martin (with his son Giles), has been released and has made number 1 in Canada.
  • The impending divorce between Paul McCartney and the former Heather Mills continues to make the pages in the tabloid press in the UK.
Project News
  • The hottest Project page this month has been Paul McCartney (see above and below).
Member News
From the Editors

If one is to be mercenary about the subject, it should be noted that Paul McCartney is going to be more noteworthy than usual in the near future as his divorce case comes to court. In that case it is great to note that a small group of Project Members (plus another individual who does not feel compelled to register himself despite important contributions) have worked very hard, and in an atmosphere of good humour, to take the McCartney piece to a succesful Good Article nomination. Perhaps this is the method to use for future articles, a small dedicated team concentrating on one subject at a time. Of course, all members are invited to join any existing group or even go about forming their own. Please note any such action in the Project Log.

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 009 – January 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Sources for the status of Irish in NI after St Andrews Agreement

I have written a line or two in the aricle "[Irish Language]]" about the Irish Language Act discussed these days following the St Andrews Agreement but maybe there is more to be written in this article or in aticles specialised in North Ireland. Because I follow the news considering language policy, but I do not have the time to write something more myself about something I don't know enough, I am listing some links for the issue to be used by someone interested:

--Michkalas 20:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 9, January 2007

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 009 – January 2007

Beatles News
  • The ongoing divorce proceedings between Paul McCartney and the former Heather Mills continues to occupy the attention of the media - Heather Mills reportedly receiving unspecified death threats.
  • The British Post Office have released a series of stamps depicting various Beatles album covers.
Project News
  • The Paul McCartney article is being primped and primed for submission as a Featured Article candidate.
  • The good folk who have been working on the above article have turned their attention to the John Lennon page. Everyone is, of course, invited to contribute.
  • The hottest Project page this month has been the Macca (Paul for those not in the know!) article, again.
  • Other Project news... Please let the editors know if anything is happening, or just contribute it to the next newsletter.
Member News
Issue of the Month

The question of capitalising of the letter "t" in The of The Beatles has been raised again. It appears that UK style references (here and here) also maintains that the letter should be in lower case. If the Project is to be appear professional then it may have to change the format. Polite discussion is invited at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles/Policy. If possible, please provide sources/references to support your position.

From the Editors

It has been a fairly quiet time with regard to the Project (or at least that is how it seems). If you are reading this and wondering why your efforts in respect of a Beatles article has not been mentioned, it may be that you haven't told any editor. This is your Newsletter, which means you can contribute to it, so please do!

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 010 – January/February 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 10, February 2007

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 010 – February 2007

Beatles News
  • George Harrison's handwritten lyrics to the song While My Guitar Gently Weeps have fetched $300,000 (£152,552) in a Scottsdale (Arizona, United States) memorabilia auction (15 January). It contained lines omitted from the final version of the song. Specifically :
I look from the wings at the play you are staging
While my guitar gently weeps
As I'm sitting here doing nothing but aging
Still my guitar gently weeps

On the reverse of the page appears the lyrics to Hey Jude in the hand of Mal Evans.

Project News
  • The Project lead article (The Beatles, for those not paying attention) has had its Good Article status reviewed, and the consensus was 'keep'. The efforts of User:Andreasegde in supplying the requested citations, and other editors in helping with general editing, and the strength of arguments for retaining the grade sufficiently impressed the reviewers.
  • After a great deal of work Paul McCartney was promoted as a Featured Article candidate. Unfortunately it failed to succeed. Among other comments, including the correct length of dash (or hyphen), from reviewers was that the article was too long and also that it needed further information included in some of the sections(!?) The promotor, and driving force behind the insertion of a great many references, citations and facts (and the remover of unwanted text, and splitter of information into daughter articles), Andreasegde vigorously argued the case for promotion but was unsuccessful.
  • Mimi Smith was successfully nominated for WP:Good article status. The major editor to whom accolades should be directed is... Andreasegde.
The Beatles' Influence on Recording Music by Apepper and Wings 1973 UK Tour by Danthemankhan.
  • The hottest Project page this month was possibly, despite the Article Status related issues regarding both The Beatles and Paul McCartney mentioned above, the third attempt to delete The Beatles trivia in less than a year. As was the case for the second attempt at AfD the result, after an energetic discourse, was keep but with a suggestion that the article be retitled to reduce the incidence of deletion requests. Editors are invited to discuss possible new titles, and/or the need for same, at Talk:The Beatles trivia.
  • Other Project news - Lar did a bit of a purge of the subscription list during last month's newsletter delivery. Some folks were kept (and are at the active list), some who clearly are not active on wikipedia at all were removed with a "you've been removed" message left (and are at the inactive list), and some folks who were less active but not as clearly completely inactive were given a "this may be your last newsletter" message (and are at the possibly inactive list). A more nuanced subscription list is now here (in several subpages as outlined above), and anyone who wants to tweak their status (moving one's self back is a clear cut sign that we should deliver the newsletter to you!) should feel free. Please respect the rather spartan formatting though, this list is used by WP:AWB currently, and may be used by other automation in future.
Issue of the Month

Hottest issue or concern for this month is the perennial matter of Project articles losing their Good or Featured Article status. The main Project page now includes a status board that gives the current ratings of some of the more important articles. Let's make sure the core articles (The Beatles, John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr) reach or retain Good Article status, if not Featured Article. If you are aware of another major article whose status is at risk, add it to the board.

Issue of last Month

Since there has been no response in the matter of the use of lowercase for the initial letter of the when applied with Beatles from the opponents, it is likely that the case for using lowercase only will be adopted as Project policy by default. User:LessHeard vanU will draw up a recommendation and submit it to the Policy talkpage in a few days.

From the Editors

We are pleased to welcome the contributions of Alexcalamaro to this newsletter. Any editor can include an item of interest or news; this medium can be an excellent tool for getting a comment seen by a great number of project members. As it says below, this is your newsletter.

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Member News

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 011 – March 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue


Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

delivered by ++Larbot - run by User:Lar - t/c 03:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 11, March 2007

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 011 – March 2007

Beatles News
  • On February 5, 2007, the Beatles' Apple Corps and Apple, Inc. (Apple Computer) announced a settlement of their latest trademark dispute involving use of the Apple trademark on the iTunes Music Store. In May of 2006, the High Court ruled in favor of Apple, but Neil Aspinall, manager of Apple Corps, vowed to appeal. Evidently, in the intervening months, the two companies negotiated a settlement. The settlement is discussed in this AP story. For background on the case, see Apple Corps v. Apple Computer. For fans, this may mean that Beatle music will be available someday on iTunes. Despite rumors of a February 2007 release, the material is still unavailalble.
Project News
  • There were no Project article adoptions for the month of February.
  • Project Policy has now been altered to reflect that the use of lowercase for the letter "t" of the word "the" in the Beatles is now considered the correct rendition.
Member News
  • New members to the project since the last issue include (although the first is a long time contributor who apparently has only just found the Participants section);
Tvoz
Freshacconci
Liamshaw
John Cardinal
Mezlo
ErleGrey
Captain Waters
Hey jude, don't let me down
Issue of the Month

See below. There is genuine concern that the Newsletter is getting stale in terms of content and variety, and that the same individuals are featured each month. Furthermore, lack of "news" is hindering the timely distribution as the editors wait for something to report. All Project editors are encouraged to give their news, suggestions and thoughts to keep the 'Letter vital and interesting. If making direct contributions do not appeal, please give a mention on the Newsletter talkpage and it will be incorporated!

From the Editors

Help is needed for the job of putting future Newsletters together. The present incumbent is finding it difficult to reflect the breadth of the Project, focusing on much the same individuals and articles each month, and has decided to beg for contributions from other individuals. Interested persons need only start working on next months issue to qualify. It really is that simple!

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 012 – April 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

delivered by ++Larbot - run by User:Lar - t/c 00:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article James Spudich, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Sancho 23:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Sancho. Go ahead and delete. Scolaire 12:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cornelius Leahy

I rated the article as start class, but please in the future do not modify the class of any article you are personally involved with - even if it's completely wrong. Instead leave the rating and request a new one. :-) - Duribald 14:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that! I'm still learning slowly. :-) Scolaire 14:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

News Time

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 012 – April 2007

Beatles News
  • On Friday 30th March, a deranged fan was held after attempting to force his way into Paul McCartney's mansion. See here for more details.
  • Apple Corps continues to make news, after the recent settlement with Apple Computer over the use of the Apple trademark. On April 10th, the company announced that long-time chief executive Neil Aspinall had stepped down and had been replaced by American Jeff Jones. It was also announced that another long term dispute, this time with EMI over royalties, had been amicably settled prior to Aspinall's departure.[10][11]
Project News
  • The article "Jeff Jones (music industry executive)" suddenly becomes of top importance in the Apple sphere of Beatledom. User:Kingboyk has created a stub on the man, but the article needs urgent beefing up (including basic biographical data such as date and place of birth) and, if possible, a photograph of the new Apple chief executive.
  • With the debate over "the Beatles" vs "The Beatles" continuing to cause ill feeling and a number of resignations from the project from advocates on both sides, Kingboyk attempted to diffuse the situation by blanking the Project Policy page and tagging it as {{historical}}. Although this unilateral action hasn't been reverted as of the time of writing, the reaction was mixed, with two members rejoining the project and others stating their disagreement. With the issue still not resolved, the page was sent to Miscellany for Deletion, for the wider community (and WikiProject The Beatles members) to consider the issue.
Member News
  • The membership list has been trimmed, with inactive members listed seperately to help gauge the status of the project. If you've been incorrectly listed as inactive, please don't be offended - just move yourself back to the main list.
The Rutles: The legendary group who inspired lesser imitators like "The Beatles". WikiWorld, March 2007
From the Editors

This has been a tumultuous month for the project yet again.

We need your input on how the project should work and what it's role should be. And we need to start getting Featured Articles, folks! :)

Next issue

This is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 013 – May 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue


Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.
BetacommandBot 23:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Irish republicanism project

Scolaire - I've noticed your recent good work and gone through you list of contributions and thought to myself that you might be able to help us out from time to time on the - {{WP:IR}} --Vintagekits 09:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good man yerself!--Vintagekits 09:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome. We're slightly disorganised at the moment, but after I've recovered from my weekend on the lash I'll try and get some more tasks and the like organised. One Night In Hackney303 09:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NI Parliament succession boxes

Thanks for your note; I like Padraig3uk's solution - it makes the situation very clear. Warofdreams talk 11:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Scolaire. Thanks for your message of support. I hope now that I have shown Snappy that there are other examples, the debate will largely be over (by the way, he didn't edit the template after I put those examples on the talk page - for some reason our edit times and signature times differ by an hour - Snappy hasn't edited the template since I gave him the proof he asked for). However, if it continues, I will ask a level-headed admin like BrownHairedGirl (who I see works on Irish politics) to lock the template as I don't really want to start a big arbitration case. Number 57 11:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Easter Rising template

Replied to you here. As I said over at the IR project talk page I've no objections to any changes being made, and would welcome it being expanded so it ends up more like {{1981 Hunger Strike}}. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 08:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Do you think another section, say "Other important figures" or similar, would be a good addition? It would be best to carry on this discussion on the template talk page if you do obviously. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 09:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Made some amendments to the template, can you take a look and see my comments on the talk page before I start including it on other pages please. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 16:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's clear that you have selected the names from the Easter Rising article as it stands - busted! I'll be the first to admit my knowledge of the Rising isn't as good as it should be, which is why I'm happy to defer to your judgment on the template. The article itself is on my lengthy to do list, as if there's one article that should be at least good article class if not featured article class it's that one. Obe thing that will need doing for that to happen is for the sourcing to be improved, ie footnotes. I've got a couple of books I've yet to read (The Easter Rising by Foy and Barton, and Easter 1916 by Townshend), as I'm reading those I'll obviously source anything appropriate. One Night In Hackney303 11:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just got what they had in Waterstones at the time to be honest. I frequently have to get them to order me more books that I want anyway, so if there's any others you can recommend that would be appreciated. When it comes to sources it's always a case of the more the better in my opinion, if an article is mostly written from a single source it always risks having a slightly skewed perspective. One Night In Hackney303 15:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I think the first four in the bibliography plus the Kathleen Clarke would be a good start. The others are a bit expensive for me, I'm sure Macardle is worth the price considering the number of pages but I'll leave sourcing from that to you I think. The Stephens one is particularly strange, Amazon have a recent 72 page edition selling for £70+ and it's not even a private seller! One Night In Hackney303 16:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to get some things on Ebay, but others books tend to be more difficult to come by and rather than wait and wait I don't mind ordering from book shops. Plus there's no need for me to get every book if you're already in possession of them anyway. I'll probably be making a start on the article in a couple of weeks, I'm in the thick of the 1981 Irish Hunger Strike at the moment, and I need to source Hugh Torney in the next week or so as well to stave off the threat of impending deletion. Once that's out of the way I'll make the Rising my new main project. One Night In Hackney303 19:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Easter Proclamation

Excellent thanks! It is much more coordinated now. Chris Buttigiegtalk 11:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Easter Rising

The hunger strike article is up to the standard I wanted to get it to, so that's one project out of the way apart from any minor fixes that need doing in the various review processes. I've still got a couple of minor projects on the go, but thought I'd make a start on reading an Easter Rising book or two later this week and seeing what to do from there. What do you think the best plan for the article is? Whenever I've tackled articles in the past I tend to find the best approach is to source what's there that can be sourced to start with, then see what else needs adding/removing/changing once that's out of the way. Does that sound reasonable enough? One Night In Hackney303 07:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Up to you really, I wasn't sure how busy you were. I'm happy enough to spend a week or so sourcing everything that's there already, then you can take over and sort the prose out? Obviously I may make some minor changes along the way while I'm sourcing as well. One Night In Hackney303 07:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds fine. Scolaire 07:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't look as if this is going to happen now, as One Night In Hackney has quit Wikipedia. If you read this, ONIH, I miss you. I wish we could have worked together. Scolaire 11:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found this blackdevil@fastmail.co.uk you might like to give it a try. --Domer48 16:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC) Give ONIH an Email !!! "about the Rising article"[reply]

Please see here regarding this, and here for some similar work I've done. Email address is above ;) 81.154.127.231 02:22, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

James Mac Guill

Can you take a look at this for me please? Is it legit or not? Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 06:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The story is a fairly typical story from the Tan War, and the Witness Statement is fairly typical of statements taken by the BMH. I would oppose its inclusion on the grounds of notability, and not worry about verifiability. Scolaire 07:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I originally moved it out of mainspace to save it from impending deletion to be on the safe side. I'll nominate it for deletion in that case. One Night In Hackney303 07:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link removal

The link to the Labour Party in the Sheehan article is there for a relevant reason, and had been there for over two years with noone having a problem with it. Just deleting it without comment is not very friendly, particularly for a lad in his fifties. I might just take the opportunity to add that the page is in the form it is in to largely reflect the background, situation and outcome of a nationalist MP caught up in the turmoils of 1914-18. It is not intended to be a "family tree" thing, even when his family is included. I grew up in an Irish speaking republican family where I was steeped in the 1916 tradition often marched up in Rathfarham to meet Margret Pearse at St. Endas. In an interview I saw by Jimmy Wales founder of Wikipedia, he was very clear in stating that his purpose was to have historic information made available to future generation which would otherwise be lost in archives or which historians would otherwise sive out of their interpretation of events. I have no bother providing the document I sent J.L. to anyone who wants it. What more can be provided than Sheehan's handwritten statement, admittedly there is the need to have the writing verified, but J.L. recognises it for sure as he has been long involved with DDS research (and we know each other personally also). Please see the note I have added to the Sheehan discussion page. Greetings Osioni 23:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Peter! Ok, no problem, this was not my best idea. But he competed for Great Britain, because Ireland was not independent in 1900? Maybe the text can be rewritten like "... Irish athlete competed for the team of Great Britain and Ireland..."? The next problem are the categories. I try to make the "Olympic bronze medalists" empty from competitors. So that every person is listed under the appropriate subcategory for his country. And I just pulled out the last competitor from the category "Olympic atheltes" :-) (except three ancient athletes, all other are now also listed under their country) Do you have an idea what we can do in these cases? The problem is, that we do not have "Ireland at the 1900 Summer Olympics". Please have a look here: 1900 Summer Olympics#Participating nations and here 1900 Summer Olympics medal count. The medals were won officially for Great Britain? Maybe we can create a special category called: "Olympic medalists for Great Britain and Ireland"? Maybe we can list him as athlete twice? Under "Olympic athletes of Great Britain" and also under "Olympic athletes of Ireland"? Thank you and :) Doma-w 15:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peter! Thank you for your nice answer. I can create a category, this is not the problem. May problem is, that we must create first of all a background. Here I think, that the best possibility is to start an article about all the Irish competitors at the Summer Olympics between 1896 and 1920 (In 1924 the name was still Great Britain and Ireland but Irish sportspeople competed seperatly for the first time for Ireland see Ireland at the 1924 Summer Olympics). So that we have a mainarticle, because we can not create an "official" article. I know, that there are about 10 Irish sportsmen winning Olympic medals in this period. Are you interested in starting such an article? I can offer my help from the Olympic side and I can do all the background like categories. Only to write an English text is no so easy for me, because I am not a native speaker. :) And I do not have enough historical background.
I am sorry, but to change the infobox and the flag template will be impossible, because all these things are in line with the official statements of the International Olympic committee! But with such an article we can make perfect links to all the relevant pages. Maybe we can name our categories Irish pre-1924 Olympic competitors and Irish pre-1924 Olympic medalists? Maybe this is better and more useful than "Olympic medalists for Great Britain and Ireland". So we can explain, that we only mean Irish sportspeople.
I would be very interested in such a project. Are you? Thank you and :) Doma-w 15:31, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Peter, I am very glad, that you are interested! This is really fine! There is no problem we have time, so we can ponder. First of all I will think about the category and show you here if you are satisfied.
Well, you see, that changing the template is not the problem, but one hour later somebody reverted. This is the problem I meant... Doma-w 21:51, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here is my first try: Category:Irish pre-1924 Olympic competitors (The text between the lines are the head of the category)

This is a list of Irish sportspeople who participated in the Summer Olympics from 1896 to 1920 while representing the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

See also:


I would include this category into:

In this three categories our new category will be shown as subcategory.

Here you can see an example for an existing category in the same style only without the links "See also": Category:Olympic athletes of the United Team of Germany

Corrections are welcomed! Kind regards Doma-w 02:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peter! Are you still interested in this project? Kind regards Doma-w 19:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All I can really say is "kind of". I was working on one article, collaborating on another and hoping to get started on another couple (including this), but, truth to tell, I have kind of dried up lately. Also I got involved in no less than three disputes, all very emotional and occasionally very nasty, and all of them concerning Great Britain and Ireland and relationships between them. I am seriously considering taking a wiki-break of a week or two. Maybe then I would get my enthusiasm back. Don't give up on me. I like your layout above and I would like to get involved when I get my act together. Cheers. Peter (Scolaire) 21:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am glad to read this. OK, no problem, the time will come. I only want to let you know, that I havn't forgotten. :) Kind regard. Doma-w 22:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicating your proposal

Sorry! I'd forgotten you proposed that. It's difficult to keep track of everything with such a large page. At least we seem to be heading in the right direction now. Readro 09:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Readro. I was only having a laugh. We do seem to be heading in the right direction, but I suspect we'll have to work hard to keep the discussion focussed on that proposal, and not keep going off at a tangent. BTW, when do you think it would be appropriate to put that proposal on the project page? You would probably be the proper person to do that since it's your baby to begin with, and also it would look more like a POV edit coming from me. Scolaire 13:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help wanted

I'd appreciate input on the dextroamphetamine talk page. I'd like to finish this discussion.--scuro 15:54, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categorising prisoners from The Troubles

Hi Scolaire. Better late than never, eh? It turns out that there isn't a mechanism for discussing proposed category creations at CfD itself, so I went to the talkpage, and invited the appropriate wikiprojects to comment. I have held back on proposing the criminals renaming yet, because its a mammoth task and I would prefer to get a groundswell of support (or otherwise) on the talkpage before tackling that, I think, would would be a controversial change. See:

Rockpocket 00:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving me the nod. I've added my 2½d to the talk page. I think renaming Category:Criminals would be a big mistake. My point all along was that there are people who are objectively criminals and people who are considered by some to be justified in their actions, but who are imprisoned on criminal charges. I think if we get a favourable response we should go ahead and create all the cats, and have them as subcats of "Prisoners and detainees" as agreed, and leave "Criminals" well alone. Scolaire 08:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a problem with that, because we can't title a cat in a general way, then exclude what we consider to be so-called "common criminals" on an arbitrary basis (the opposing argument, of course, is that if a person is jailed under common criminal charges, they are a common criminal irrespective of their political claims). The title of the cat has to reflect the contents, and as it is the title essentially reflects a duplication (or a large subcat) of criminals. We could go ahead and do what you suggest, but it will lead to further problems not too far down the road (such as a merge with criminals leading to the these arguments of the last month all over again). If we are going to do this we should do it properly and completely now. Rockpocket 08:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ouch! You're right, of course. I'm going to go and have a cup of tea and see if I can figure a way around this. If I come up with anything, I'll post it on the talk page. Scolaire 08:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From your response, I gather the cup of tea had the desired effect :-) Scolaire 17:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Haha. Yes. I don't think it solves the ultimate problem, but it does bypass it in an elegant way. Thinking more about it more over-night, we have anough on our plate trying to keep everyone happy as it is, and it would be a real shame if the whole thing was brought down on this issue. It may be that by leaving criminals out of it completely to begin with, no-one will try and bring them back together in the future. If they do, I guess we can deal with that then. Rockpocket 17:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, Scolaire, thanks for your words of support at ArbCom. I appreciate it. I just wanted to let you know I haven't forgotten the POW recategorisation plan. I just thought it prudent to avoid editing Troubles related articles while the ArbCom is ongoing. Things are complicated enough without that issued being dragged into it. (Though, in some ways this is a good example of how constructive progress can be made in this thorny field: thrashing out compromise with discussion, then moderate editors move forward towards consensus while marginalising those who are interesting in POV pushing.) Anyway, once everthing settles down, I will get on with implementing the plan of action. Rockpocket 18:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Republican Movement (Ireland)

Scolaire, I see you provided sources on this article one to the IRSP website one to an RSF statement on indymedia these would not be regarded as reliable sources on their own.--padraig 22:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I said on the talk page they were not good sources. I'm only trying to write an article that shows how the term "Republican Movement" is used. I don't want bits being deleted just because they don't suit a particular POV. Scolaire 22:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then find reliable sources, not the POV of any one group.--padraig 22:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, you find reliable sources. I can't be arsed. Scolaire 22:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Back, sort of

Got a few things that need to be taken care of here, but once they are done I'll be gone again. Still not got much further along with the Rising sorry, been quite ill for the last month or so. I'll hopefully have some progress after the weekend. One Night In Hackney303 14:53, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, welcome back! Sorry to hear you haven't been well. And I'm sorry to hear you can't be persuaded to stay. Good luck with the ArbCom. I see I'm a mentioned party (below) so I'll probably make an appearance there at some stage. Scolaire 08:59, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and good luck with the FAC, too. Scolaire 12:09, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, the result is in! Now onwards and upwards to the main page on 3 October with any luck... One Night In Hackney303 22:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hurray! Well done! Scolaire 22:56, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom case

User:SqueakBox has filed Wikipedia:Request for arbitration#User:Vintagekits and you are a mentioned party. Kittybrewster (talk) 21:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The above named arbitration case, in which you were named as a party, has opened. Please submit your evidence directly on the case page, or, if needed, submit it via email to an arbitrator or an arbitration clerk.

For the Arbitration clerk committee,
- Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 11:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category

My watchlist shows you're busy removing it, I've just started a discussion about that on the category talk page actually, if you want to add your views. One Night In Hackney303 23:22, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll go to bed now. If he hasn't reverted by tomorrow somebody will have to. Scolaire 23:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been busy preparing for the campaign to get the hunger strike article on the main page. I created this then realised that if blanket protest and dirty protest were going to be linked to from the main page they'd need improving slightly from the stubs they were, so I've been busy with that. There's still plenty of room for improvement and expansion on both, but they're acceptable enough for now I think. One Night In Hackney303 23:35, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update

After many weeks of illness I'm feeling slightly better and I'll crack on with some more research for the Rising article, and the ArbCom case will probably last long enough to fix that up. I've still got to write an article about the "other" Brian Keenan too, but that's a relatively simple task as I've got notes for all the source material done, it's much easier when I just have to use bits from various books rather than read several books in their entirety. One Night In Hackney303 14:15, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More power to you! I'm following the ArbCom but damn-all else. My Free Derry efforts haven't got any farther than a couple of paragraphs on paper. Just so long as they don't go ahead with that idea of a blanket ban on "Troubles" edits! Scolaire 14:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah well, that was W. Frank's response to the motion I proposed to stop edits like this. Note that the really important part is the addition of "and regards this heritage as important for continuing electoral success", which isn't supported by any source.... One Night In Hackney303 14:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'd certainly support a ban on him! Dammit - now you've got me editing Provisional Irish Republican Army! Scolaire 14:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry! I'm coming over to Dublin some time in the next few months hopefully, I'll drop you an email about it when the event is organised. One Night In Hackney303 18:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I've just returned from Wikibreak, and seen (after spending most of the morning going through the relevant pages) that you've taken exception to a posting of mine (see here). I think that you've probably misinterpreted what I've written (just for the record, Giano's stupid attack page is quite wrong in its interpretation). Please could I trouble you to set out what you find offensive in my post and I'll comment further. Thank you in advance.--Major Bonkers (talk) 10:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, Major Bonkers, when I said "the whole section 'Champagne' on User talk:Kittybrewster, culminating in this diff" I meant only that yours was the last post to that section, so that by linking to that diff I could show the section in its entirety, including the heading. By "culminating" I did not mean to imply that your post was in any way climactic, or particularly offensive. To be honest, I don't understand most of that post. It seems to be written in some sort of private lingo. Reading it again now, you might actually be chiding Kittybrewster et al (I had no idea what "Aytong or Arrer" meant until I re-read Giano's page just now), but I genuinely can't be sure. My problem with the whole section, as I said, was with the use of a user talk page by a group of mates to abuse disparage a fellow editor, however disruptive, while sipping virtual champagne. As far as I can see, there has been no evidence or proposed findings of fact against you personally in the ArbCom, and I'm fine with that. Scolaire 09:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for yours. I don't really want to comment on the Vintagekits/ Troubles arbitration, as it seems to me to be a quite pointless waste of time - apart from anything else, at the moment, it's Hamlet without the prince. I'm sure you're aware of Kittybrewster's take on the situation, and I'll just repeat my own view that he's suffered more than anyone else from Vintagekits' behaviour.
I see that the 'stupid attack page' link is now red. How anyone could think that 'Eton' and 'Harrow', pronounced with a Irish accent, come out as 'Aytong' and 'Arrer' is beyond me. I give my Irish relations credit for knowing how to pronounce the letter 'H'! Perhaps Giano learnt all about English accents from Dick Van Dyke's famously mangled cockney accent in Mary Poppins!--Major Bonkers (talk) 09:52, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you mis-read my post. I certainly didn't mean that I want my talk page used to disparage a fellow editor. Scolaire 17:01, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid that a legal training encourages close reading of texts, so I don't think that I have misread what you have written. I am sorry if you see it as abusive of Giano, which wasn't the intention. However, if you go seeking offense, you're bound to find it.--Major Bonkers (talk) 19:51, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi, Peter! Thank very much for your help! No problem, I know, that the time will come for your article. :) Kind regards! Doma-w 14:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anything that can be done with this, which I saved from a disruptive AfD nomination (4 minutes after it was created!). There's been mentions of him in various other articles for quite some time, so it's reasonable enough to assume he's covered in some sources which I'm not in possession of, but you might be? One Night In Hackney303 14:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit of a mess, really! According to the article his notability is for the War of Idependence, according to Chronology of the Irish Civil War it's for freeing the prisoners in Dundalk on 27 July 1922, and according to Sean F. Quinn it's for being shot in 1923 when the Free State troops tried to recapture Frank Aiken. Fourth Northern Division of the Irish Republican Army brings in the bit about the ASU in Dublin, without any context. Neither he or Seán F. is in any books that I have. Eoin Neeson's The Civil War confirms the account of the attack on Dundalk jail, but gives no names apart from Aiken's. It might be worthwhile asking Jdorney, who wrote the Chronology of the Civil War article. He might have a source for you. Scolaire 13:30, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above named Arbitration case has closed. The Arbitration Committee decided that [a]ny user who hereafter engages in edit-warring or disruptive editing on these or related articles may be placed on Wikipedia:Probation by any uninvolved administrator. This may include any user who was a party to this case, or any other user after a warning has been given. The Committee also decided to uplift Vintagekits' indefinite block at the same time.

The full decision can be viewed here.

For the Arbitration Committee, Daniel 08:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibreak

The user is on a wikibreak. There's just too much rage around here right now. Scolaire 23:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Easter Rising 2

Hey, Scolaire, I guess you're still on break, but we could use a few sensible minds at the Easter Rising talk page again, if you have the stomach for it. -R. fiend (talk) 05:12, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm replying on your talk page because of the time lag - you may not be still watching me. Scolaire (talk) 11:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your note. What you are proposing seems to make sense. In general, I am in favour of making choices such that we can move on and improve the article with the minimum of further drama. I sense though that this may be out of our hands; and I have to say too that R. fiend has done himself no favours in the way he has approached this matter. --John (talk) 16:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The RfC isn't about the easter rising article, its about F. Fiend abuse of his admin powers whilst being involved in content disputes, this is not a isolated case, he has done it on other articles and I believe he even blocked a editor that he was involved in a dispute with. What I want to see come out of this is a warning to admins not to abuse their powers in these cases, as first and foremost admin are just editors and have to abid by the same rules as everyone else.--Padraig (talk) 17:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I want to see R. fiend's attitude and behaviour discussed. However there is other stuff going on that I want to bring out into the open and have a discussion on. The alternatives are two user RfCs or one article RfC in which the approach of all editors is discussed, hopefully with a view to improving understanding rather than imposing sanctions. Scolaire (talk) 17:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds reasonable. Let us await developments. --John (talk) 18:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that. I was giving it a few minutes. I'll put a comment on the talk page now. Scolaire (talk) 19:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibreak over

Welcome back to my talk page. It's a New Year and I'm talking to people again. Scolaire (talk) 16:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

I thought we were going to be starting a RfC for the users' conduct, not the content of the article. You can reply there as several people are watching that page. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The user conduct RfC has now been filed - Alison 02:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for adding that statement. It adds a little balance and perspective to the situation - I'm more than aware that Domer is not exactly an angel and an innocent in all this, too - Alison 18:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I just wanted to be sure I got it right before I posted it :) Scolaire (talk) 20:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peadar Clancy

Thanks re: the Clancy Article. Over the coming weeks I hope to do one on Conor Clune, and expand the Dick McKee article. Any help or suggestions would be more than welcome. On Conor Clune I have a number of sources which say that he was a Volunteer, and an equal number which state the opposite. One example being the plaque in the picture over the guard room on the Clancy Article. Now my own opinion is (which means nothing at all), is that when he is described as an innocent victim, it means he was innocent in relation to the events planned for the morning of Bloody Sunday. That is, he had no involvement in any of the planning for the attacks on the British Spies. Any ideas on this yourself?--Domer48 (talk) 19:36, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was my understanding - that he was a Volunteer from Clare (?) who was in Dublin for talks of some sort, and because he was in the company of McKee and Clancy when they were arrested they took him for a leader as well. I'll have a look and see if there is anything on my bookshelf. Scolaire 07:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, the only book I can find that talks about it is The Squad, which I'm sure you've read. One interesting thing I did see though - his uncle was Patrick Clune, Archbishop of Perth, who became peripherally involved in negotiations after Bloody Sunday and discussed Ireland with Pope Benedict XV. Scolaire 07:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Came across this which seems to suggest he was a civilian, scroll down to November 21--Padraig (talk) 08:27, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily, only that he wasn't one of the planners. According to The Squad he was arrested in Vaughans Hotel because he wasn't registered and he hadn't a toothbrush. He had come with Peadar Clancy and then been "forgoten about". The question is, if Clancy went to Vaughans just for an IRA meeting, why would he bring a civilian? Doesn't it seem more likely that he was in Dublin on IRA, but not Bloody Sunday, business? Scolaire 08:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Squad also has Collins refering to the death of Two soldiers of Ireland, which would be strange if Clune was also a Volunteer that he didn't mention him. Its possible he was on the fringes but not a volunteer, and knew Clancy.--Padraig (talk) 08:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a small start to the Conor Clune article. Should we move this discussion over there? --Domer48 (talk) 11:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. I've copied this to the talk page. Scolaire (talk) 17:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

If the vote ends up at no consensus I'll ask as the Wiki IRC channel to see where we stand Gnevin (talk) 10:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: Talbot tag

The reason I tagged it is because: 1) I'm hardly an expert--or even someone who had heard of Mr Talbot before reading that article--on this subject, and frankly have neither the time nor interest to become one. 2) That article is rather egregious by any standard in its lack of citations/sources, and again, time/interest as previous. 3) I don't believe adding the tag endows me with a special responsibility. I'm simply informing others of the problem. Crunk (talk) 01:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am leaving a friendly notice to invite you to participate at a requested move from 'Football in the Republic of Ireland' to 'Association football in the Republic of Ireland', due to your participation in a previous requested move. Hope to see you there! EJF (talk) 21:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for the invite. Scolaire (talk) 23:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query On 13 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Neville Francis Fitzgerald Chamberlain, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Daniel Case (talk) 05:27, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

?

Hi Peter! I only tried to bring all the athletes in line and 99% have a date of birth written in the style May 20, 1877. Also 99% of all have their nickname written in the style "Pat" and I placed the nick "Pat" behind Patrick, because Pat is short for Patrick and not for Joseph? Maybe this are not the biggest problems, but I only want to explain why I did my changes. Kind regards and :) Doma-w (talk) 00:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay. I knew why you did it. But a nickname should always come immediately before the surname, and articles on Irish and British subjects have dates in the day, month, year format. It means that some of your 99% might need to be changed. Regards. Scolaire (talk) 08:14, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what it says on the tin! One Night In Hackney303 18:57, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had guessed the "FU" bit. Thanks for the link :-) Scolaire (talk) 19:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rising

Possibly in the next day or so, I'm busy finishing an article that must be finished today for reasons which will only be apparent when it's finished. I kept meaning to do something with the Rising article, but after seeing the warzone it had become I didn't think it was a productive use of my time. However after spending this weekend in Dublin seeing various places including Glasnevin I'm slightly more inspired to get something done with it. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 12:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Looking forward to it. Scolaire (talk) 12:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well it took a few days longer than I'd hoped for, but that is what I've spent what seems like an ice age working on. One Night In Hackney303 21:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nice one, Hackney. I took a 36 hr wikibreak so I've only just seen it now. All I can say is I wish I had your energy! Scolaire (talk) 00:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It was only finished a few hours ago, it was quite heavy going so didn't get it done in time for 1 April when the riot actually started. One Night In Hackney303 00:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So what's the chances of Easter Rising being a Good Article by 24 April? Scolaire (talk) 00:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Depends really, there's several factors involved. Firstly on how motivated I am for the next few days, I've still got some tweaks and additions to do on the article above but I'm mentally burned out right now. Secondly based on recent history World War 3 could break out over something as minor as the wording of a sentence, and given most of the sentences in the article are unreferenced and may need rewording depending on what sources say, there's all sorts of possibility for time consuming arguments to make things grind to a halt. Thirdly the GA nomination procedure is generally quite backlogged, and it can take up to a month to get a review done. There's an editor I know who's generally happy to review specific articles within a few days rather than waiting an eternity and this should be one of them, but we'd still need to get to that point first. All in all, I'd lean towards it not being done by 24 April, as it'd be better to get it done right than quickly. One Night In Hackney303 01:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm embarrassed now. I meant to put in a smiley after that question 'cause it was only tongue-in-cheek. I'm in this for the long haul, but it would be nice if people now started making substantial, referenced edits and took a rest from arguing over angels on the head of a pin. We shall see! Scolaire (talk) 16:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Anything's possible. After all, I did create an article that was promoted to GA in just over 14 hours. One Night In Hackney303 20:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Surprise Draw

You have won the Irish Wikipedians surprise draw!! Just leave a message on my talk page to receive the prize of USD 1,000,000 or EUR 638,442.37 or GBP 505,871.414 Markreidyhp 07:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's quite funny...I guess! Scolaire (talk) 16:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Free Derry

Great work on the article. Left a few initial comments on the talk page. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 19:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the rating, and the comments. The latest re-write was a bit of a rush job so I'm not surprised that some of the writing was a bit sloppy. I'll get down to it soon. As well as more detail on Motorman I hope to write some aftermath/legacy stuff. Scolaire (talk) 19:16, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't call it sloppy really. It's more a case of different people have different perspectives, so a fresh pair of eyes always spots things. One Night In Hackney303 19:19, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Pierre Cour

A tag has been placed on Pierre Cour requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, 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 indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. kickenchicken 03:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy delete was speedily declined. Scolaire (talk) 07:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages

Scholar, I humbly ask your pardon if I bored you to tears talking about my"offspring" .I will refrain from using GDD1000's talk pages, but in future I'll be asking you to keep a civil tongue when addressing me. A man in his fifties should know better, especially one who refers to himself as a scholar.jeanne (talk) 06:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is my post - a bit irritable, certainly, but I don't see incivility. You should see some of what gets said on talk pages! Anyway, I apologise for any offence caused and thank you for your prompt response. Scolaire (talk) 08:00, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Apology accepted and thank you for your speedy reply.Again I'm sorry if I occupied talk pages for personal chat.In future I'll send e-mails.My e-mail is also available-that way private opinions or domestic problems do not become public domain! Cheers,Jeanne.

Phantom Taoiseach & Mature Recollection AfDs

Hi Scolaire, you've nominated Phantom Taoiseach & Mature recollection for deletion. You didn't quite complete the process so I took the liberty. The full instructions are at here - Template:AfD in 3 steps.

I've left a comment on each AfD page on what should happen to these articles; Phantom Taoiseach merge with Taoiseach; Mature recollection merge with Brian Lenihan, Snr and/or 1990 Presidential election. Tx, Snappy56 (talk) 10:51, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't nominate either of them, I {{Prod}}ed them. If you have replaced the prod template with an AfD that is your right. Or have the rules changed in the last few months? Scolaire (talk) 11:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
AfD is a better way, you create a discussion page, people discuss it, and there maybe a consensus to delete it, or to keep it or to merge it. Snappy56 (talk) 12:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a rule. If you want to nominate that's fine, but don't accuse me of sloppy housekeeping. Scolaire (talk) 12:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New poll on The Great Hunger

You've started a new poll and indicated that the current move request has failed. Just to point out that it has not, and that it is more likely this time that a move will take place. I'd hate to see your new poll been taken as fact that the move request is over..... --Bardcom (talk) 18:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to this. Bookworm's re-opening of the MR just hours later was against convention, did not follow procedure and has been left hanging ever since, that is, there has never been a vote, just a series of straw polls. If it's not over it should be! Scolaire (talk) 18:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake! It was you who added the template without going through procedures. It is closed then. Excellent! Scolaire (talk) 18:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Without going through procedures? Can you explain what you mean by that please? Kindly revert your removal of the template - it is currently listed in Requested Moves, and procedure was followed as far as I am aware. --Bardcom (talk) 19:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[egg on face and goofy grin] Here is where you followed procedure. Because there was no mention of the new RM in the body of the discussion, I jumped to the conclusion that there had not been one (and as a result I was completely baffled by the Discussion moved from WP:RM section). Humblest apologies and I will restore the template immediately! Scolaire (talk) 19:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Too late. You already have. Just humblest apologies then! Scolaire (talk) 19:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
:-) No problem. I've kinda jumped across your latest poll - just to try to get closure on the previous process. I suspect that many people that selected Option 1 would have no objections to Option 4 - and your poll so far also seems to support this. If this is the case, and the original editors that selected Option 1 indicate that they have no objections to Option 4, then perhaps we'll have a consensus for Option 4. Anyway, we're both rowing in the same direction... --Bardcom (talk) 20:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, yeah! I left a comment at the bottom just before I read this. It miight have come across as a bit peevish. Sorry again!  :-) Scolaire (talk) 20:05, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(reduce)A number of editors who participated in the previous discussions have not - as far as I can see - been invited to participate in the latest one, e.g. Relata refero, Alai, Cameron, etc. Will you fix that? Better if you do it! Wotapalaver (talk) 11:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. Scolaire (talk) 14:00, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just thought it was "neater" if you did it. Wotapalaver (talk) 14:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Still appears to be going well. At what stage do you think we should ask people to state their position via a "final" poll or the table thingy? --Bardcom (talk) 16:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! Yes, I've been thinking about that. It's interesting at the moment with dates v no dates, end date v open-ended, Great Irish v Great Famine, in Ireland v (Ireland) etc. Since everybody is thinking hard, I'm inclined to give it at least another 24 hours. What you do then - well, although the table looks good on the finished page, on the edit screen it's a bit frightening; Sarah made a correction that time and I never quite figured out what she'd done. That might conceivably put people off voting. I was thinking of maybe asking people to vote in the format "Prefer Name A, Oppose Name B, Name C, Name D, Will Accept Name E, Name F". The selected name would be the one with the most prefers AND the fewest opposes. Scolaire (talk) 17:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The next question after that is, how do you conclude the RM. I have no experience of - indeed I have never seen before - an "options" move. How do you go for a final vote without bracketing all the acres of redundant discussion about discarded names? If you know the answer and the answer is simple - great! If not, I was wondering if the best course might be to, first, make a new request, then, replace the template with a "The Great Hunger → Everybody's favourite name" one and, finally, add a note on Wikipedia:Requested moves#Backlog (pretending you don't see my foot-in-mouth moment) that the request has been superseded by a new, named request. How does all that strike you? Scolaire (talk) 17:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My money is on Great Famine (Ireland) at the moment. Sarah777's imprimatur a few minutes ago has clinched it for me. Scolaire (talk) 17:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. By moving my comments on the Great Hunger talk page you "broke" a couple of references to other comments being below mine. Can you move my comment back to where I put it please? Wotapalaver (talk) 06:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, don't bother. Just please don't move my talk page comments again. Wotapalaver (talk) 06:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And please don't wedge your comments into the thread of the discussion again. It "breaks" the flow and makes the rest of the thread unintelligible. Scolaire (talk) 08:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I put my comments where I think they make most sense. You can put your comments where you think they make most sense. Wotapalaver (talk) 07:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You could save yourself the trouble. They don't make any better sense wherever you put them. Scolaire (talk) 12:59, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please remain civil. I've detected an increasingly sarcastic and unpleasant tone in some of your posts recently. Wotapalaver (talk) 08:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll try to say this in a tactful way. Obviously you believe that you are presenting logical arguments in a reasonable way, but to me - and I can't help this, it's just the way it is - it comes across as provocative, especially when you make a point of responding to my every post to tell me (so it seems to me) that I don't understand anything about it! After a certain time of responding in a civil manner and trying to put across my POV in a coherent and uncombative way, I eventually begin to feel I am being baited, and if I am baited for long enough I will bite. The best advice I can give you is to make the assumption that I and others have read, digested and understood your arguments already, and so it will not be necessary to drive the point home yet again. And if you feel you must comment, try to read over your post before clicking 'save' and ask yourself whether it is likely to be seen as throwing light on the situation, or getting up people's nose. I don't really know what else I can say. Scolaire (talk) 15:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent)You need to add "Irish Potato Famine" to your poll, for completeness, even if it's just to show that a lot of people object to it. Without this option, this poll cannot be accepted as the final poll. Do it quickly before too many people register their selection. --Bardcom (talk) 16:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sergei Baltacha and Olga (?)

Hello, your message came just in time, when I'm switching to sports, and perhaps mostly Soviet sports-related topics. And I'll keep needed clarifications in the article on Sergei Baltacha on my to do list. Cmapm (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Thanks a million. Scolaire (talk) 18:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GDD1000

My take on the whole situation. To be honest I think you're being slightly hard on Domer and Dunc. Regardless of what they (and others) did, he really didn't help himself. You know as well as anyone the problems he had with self published sources, you were even involved in at least one discussion about them. Time after time he was told, and yet there's still edits like this use of a self published source, and there's plenty more where that came from. I had no real dog in this battle other than neutrality, sadly most people didn't get that because of the inherent systematic bias with the "IRA are murdering terrorist bastards" opinionated editors (ie, anyone who reads The Sun for starters) being in the majority meant that the articles were similarly slanted so most of the POV removing only went in one direction. Now I was here long enough to recognise POV editing when I see it, and I see plenty of it in GDD1000's editing. For example an uninvolved third party (you know, the ones GDD1000 supposedly listened to?) removed unsourced POV commentary, which was clearly a good edit. So what did GDD1000 do? Reverted, and suggested the page be protected. That's an indefensible edit by anyone's standards. Now we'll moved onto his editing of The Troubles, and there's plenty of dodgy editing went on there. However the best example is this edit where he "Removed commentary". Now commentary or not, the perspective that the Republican Movement saw the level of support during the hunger strike as a "potential for political and electoral strategy" is indisputably true and easily sourced, the addition of {{cn}} would have solved that rapidly. However it was quickly removed, which on its own isn't a major problem. But he neglects to remove the Unionist perspective despite it being unsourced and commentary, and he definitely knew it was there because he edited the sentence. Tag both perspectives for sources? No problem. Remove both perspectives? No problem. Leave both unsourced perspectives in the article? Not ideal, but no problem. Remove one and not the other? POV editing, and the sort we can do without. So while it's easy to paint him as the victim of the piece, it's just as easy to paint him as a POV pusher who just didn't get the way Wikipedia works despite it being explained time and again. In my opinion he made no real effort to conform to Wikipedia expecting it instead to conform to him, and as recent events have shown it's play by our rules, or don't play at all.... One Night In Hackney303 16:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is one thing I can be criticised for: I didn't say, and I should have, that that guy had major problems with adhering to consensus, that he dug his own grave time and time and time again, and that I opted out of the article as soon as I decently could because he was driving me mental! But that's all beside the point. I was involved in far more than one discussion with him. I was talking to him on his talk page as well as the article talk page. As I do when I'm trying to work through a problem, I was engaging in dialogue with him. And it was maddening beyond belief to have that dialogue interrupted over and over by shouts of "OR", "reliable sources" etc. etc.! Each time I thought he might be about to take something on board, the two of them goaded him again for no other apparent reason than the sheer sport of it. Even if your adversary is the worst POV-pusher on the wiki (and GDD would certainly be in the finals) the use of those tactics (Domers famous quote in another context of "I know how to handle that gobshite") is disruptive not just to the editor but to the article and the talk-page themselves. And here's a question: GDD walked away from WP - a golden opportunity to correct all the POV slants in the UDR article without opposition! So why did editing on the article stop dead the day he left? I can't help asking, how much of it was desire to produce a good article and how much was just the thrill of battle? And isn't it great when another editor on another article starts adding outrageous POV-ridden material like "infamous coffin-ship" so you can go out and die for your country again? That's my take on it. Scolaire (talk) 17:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]