User talk:Ddstretch

	SandBoxes
	New Table of Civil Parishes classified by Settlement
	/Sandbox 2
	/Sandbox 3
	Cheshire WikiProject Sub-Page Sandbox
	Template Sandbox
	/Sandbox 6

	Archives
	1: July 2006 - November 2006
	2 - November 2006 - August 2007
	3 - August 2007 - (continues)

You can click here to leave me a new message with a new subject heading. I will reply on this page unless you request otherwise.

Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.
For replies to previous messages, please indent your posts with ":" if replying to an existing topic (or "::" if replying to a reply).
I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to Watch this page until you are responded to.

Chester mess

David. I hope you realise that my comment on Talk:Chester was not addressed at you but at the inexperienced new editor who is trying to run before s/he can walk. Let's hope in time that s/he becomes a useful contributor. Best wishes (and don't take Wikipedia TOO seriously - as you well know there are more important things in life!). Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you're getting this trouble. I've added a couple of comments to Talk:Chester in the hope that the "message" will be received and understood. But looking at the track record I am not optimistic. Cheers, Peter. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the contact about Chester. I was vaguely aware that there had been some disturbance on that article some time ago, but I made the call to fix a few things (it was just unbearable for me any longer!)

When I clicked on www.chesterwiki.com/ it appeared to be a deadlink. Having just clicked it again, it's up and running, so, I'll add that back into the ELs.

I'll monitor the article for changes, and see if there are any objections!... Hopefully not though! -- Jza84 · (talk) 13:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing AfDs

I cannot stand for the intolerant, uncivil and completely disrespectful way that you behaved during the AfDs I nominated. I am withdrawing the AfDs not because I think I was wrong in any way, but rather because I refuse to participate in any type of conversation with you specifically any further. Completely unacceptable. • Freechild'sup? 13:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disagreeing with you does not equate to incivility. Respect was there, but your refusal to address any of the criticisms offered by others indicated that you were merely making a POINT, and it was difficult to maintain that. I am not alone in drawing that conclusion as you will see from others' contributions. I wish you well, but you do need to be able to take disagreements with your arguments if you want to have a good relationship with wikipedia. I urge you to continue, and wish you well. DDStretch (talk) 13:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note that I share your (DDStretch) standpoint on this. I know I may be biased as I've worked with you closely in the past, but I really can't see any incivility in your text re List of churches in....". Infact, I don't think I've ever seen any incivil text from you.... I sometimes wish I did, then I'd know I'm not the only mortal on here!

Seriously though, I see no need for Freechild to be upset - I can see he had Wikipedia's best interests at heart, but just failed to secure a consensus with the community. I would urge Freechild to consider debate, even heated debate, to often be a good thing for articles and Wikipedia as a whole, and part and parcel of being adventurous. There are many things which make me mad on Wikipedia (like Scotland being a nation in Europe), but I respect the consensus and just plod along making changes where I see I can. -- Jza84 · (talk) 20:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments, James, here and on Maleus' talk page. I think he does need to re-assess his approach to things. I agree that heated debate (which is not inherently uncivil) is a good way of getting things out in the open. I am sad that he thinks it was just me who drove him to withdraw the AfDs, rather than realising that there was just no consensus and no good reason for deleting the articles. He just didn't do a good job with them. Oh well... DDStretch (talk) 14:12, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deva Victrix

The claim is make can be fully substantiated that Cheshire County Council (CCC) indeed make a profit from people visiting, therefore your allegation that I am making false allegations stating "Please try not to fall into the trap of making false allegations in order to fit in with what you would like to happen" I believe you need to reconsider your thoughts as from what I can see, those with an interest in this are making the false allegations. It is quite clear that the CCC make profit and therefore it is giving the CCC a promotional gain by linking to the site. I would appreciate the matter more if you actually knew what you were talking about before making false allegations. Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.239.238 (talk) 17:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, sign your posts. Second, please do not become any more disruptive to make a point than you already are. The message I left was accurate and it is you who needs to step back from the matter. My responses on User talk:Majorly's talk page address the concerns, as does his comments. DDStretch (talk) 17:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let me apologise for not signing my message left earlier, I don't believe for a moment that my actions was disruptive, more along the lines of removing links to external websites for promotional gain, which I am sure you are an intelligent person that you understand what promotional means, and thus the CCC make profit. I have perused your reply left on User talk:Majorly's talk page and agree with your actions.