User talk:HighKing: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:50, 7 June 2010

You are welcome to leave messages here. I will reply here (rather than on, say, your user page). Conversely, if I've left a message on your talk page, I'm watching it, so please reply there. If your messages are rude, wandering or repetitive I will likely edit them and may even delete them. If you want to leave such a message, put it on your talk page and leave me a note here. In general, I prefer to conduct my discussions in public. If you have a question for me, put it here (or on the article talk, or...) rather than via email.

Template:Archive box collapsible

Great Britain and Ireland

I've rewritten that page again another way trying to include your perspective. I hope it is a meeting ground between us both. --RA (talk) 09:23, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking good. Your addition of "as a word on its own" makes your point, but ensures readers understand that they may be looking up a phrase/entity, or they may have to be pointed to two entities joined by "and". I've redirected "Britain and Ireland" here too - do you think we should also have a small section dealing with "Britain" as a word on its own? --HighKing (talk) 09:39, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saw the redirect. It's much of a muchness which to point at which (but "Great Britain" seems to be the wiki preference).

I've stuck in "Britain" as another form of "Great Britain", but I wouldn't both adding sections explaining the words any more. It would just be forking off info (better) dealt with elsewhere. --RA (talk) 10:15, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks RA. Wasn't trying to be obtuse or deliberately awkward in our discussion either. Too much respect for you for that. --HighKing (talk) 13:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

try [1] Mister Flash (talk) 13:10, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, High King. If you are talking of the posting that is still in the thread, it might be a good idea if it was deleted till you receive a reply from an oversighter. Cheers. Jack forbes (talk) 16:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a closer look, I do see oversights at 13:24, 13:25 and 13:26. Jack forbes (talk) 16:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By their very nature, you can't see oversights... :-) These are revdel's AFAIK. --HighKing (talk) 17:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doh! I won't be going for a job as oversighter any time soon then! I guess I thought I was smarter than I really am. :) Jack forbes (talk) 17:18, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected sockpuppet

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HighKing. Mister Flash (talk) 19:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 :By their very nature, you can't see oversights... :-)  These are revdel's AFAIK.  --[[User:HighKing|HighKing]] ([[User talk:HighKing#top|talk]]) 17:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 ::Doh! I won't be going for a job as oversighter any time soon then! I guess I thought I was smarter than I really am. :) [[User:Jack forbes|Jack forbes]] ([[User talk:Jack forbes|talk]]) 17:18, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
+== Suspected sockpuppet ==
+[[File:Information.svg|25px]] You are suspected of [[Wikipedia:Sock puppetry|sockpuppetry]], which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guidance#Defending yourself against claims|notes for the suspect]], then respond to the evidence at [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HighKing]]. [[User:Mister Flash|Mister Flash]] ([[User talk:Mister Flash|talk]]) 19:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC)