Jump to content

User talk:Proberton/archive1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Proberton

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Proberton (talk | contribs) at 09:59, 2 April 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Proberton, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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:Questions, 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! 

As well as all that, the footnotes system is explained at Wikipedia:Footnotes. The search function takes a while to update, so new pages don't appear straight away (I am not sure why), see Wikipedia:Searching for more. The James Roberton article name is correct as it stands, see Wikipedia:Naming conventions for guidance on article titles. And finally, thanks for getting stuck in, glad you're here and I hope you stay and enjoy contributing! Cheers, ::Supergolden:: 08:10, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stolen generation

I wrote an extensive reply to your comment, hit save and crashed the application - gone! Do not trust the edit box, is my first piece of advice. Use a stable, external application to compose longer edits, then paste them in. I am not even going to try to recontruct it.

Objective, collaborate – YES. I'm willing. ... is the five words or less version. Not as likely to engage your intellect though. Drop me a note and I will start the discussion with a reply to your comments. I agree with many of them and think that I can see a way to include them. I should point out that I have done little to this article other than protecting it from vandals and citing sources for belligerent editors with an axe to grind, or a personal interest in preserving out-moded fiction regarding Australian history. A increase in objectivity would offer better protection and, of course, create an article that most could not disagree with.

Oh, and welcome to wikipaedia. Regards, Fred 10:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wills

I can't claim credit; I only made a few format adjustments. Glad you like the photo, though :) - Nunh-huh 08:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roberton

Hello. I have had difficulty finding out anything about the Barony of Roberton & whatI have found is, on the face of it, a little contradictory. The various 'old Ayrshire' history books have been my only sources. I noticed by the way that a house in Benslie near Kilwinning is called 'Roberton.' I will let you know if I find out anything. Rosser 09:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I found out a little more - have a look at the Lambroughton or Eglinton Country Park entries. Cheers.Rosser (talk) 20:16, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Graphic

I use Inkscape. A lot of it is copy/paste. The French deserve a lot of credit with their "Blasons Project". Most of the complicated stuff I just grab from files they've already created. The hardest part is keeping track of where I find things so the right people get the credit for their work, then looking into whether or not it came from copyrighted material. I just had to replace all of the harps in the England arms, because I found out that it came from a copyrighted website.

I can probably put a coat together for you. Let me know what the blazon is. -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 05:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's your email address? -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 06:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Wessex Children

Dear Sir, you are cordially invited to join a discussion on this matter at WikiProject British Royalty. Yours in anticipation, † DBD 16:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "Prince/ss X of Wales" Issue

Just thought I'd let you know that there's a discussion about the above at the WikiProject, and I'm inviting all of the members to join in † DBD 13:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usain Bolt

I've added this information to the article now. Thanks. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 15:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar Question

So, what did you ever end up doing for that group of individuals who was deserving of barnstars that you asked about? Just curious how you resolved the problem. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Time for resolution

Hiya. For several months now, the article naming for 18th Century British royals has been ever-which-where — all over the shop. In an attempt to solve this, I have prepared a page for discussion: here. Please, please, please come and discuss, even contribute to the Poll. Cheers! DBD 15:36, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, some random user moved them all to the "of Great Britain" titles without correcting middle name misuse, so I'm now just requesting the moves to correct that remaining issue. I'd appreciate your support at that link. Also, I really appreciate you inquiring after it. DBD 17:54, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Football (soccer)

The debate to rename the term football (soccer) to just simply "football" or "association football" has opened again. Please feel free to give your opinion here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football_(soccer)_in_Australia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.224.0.121 (talk) 02:31, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clan Donnachaidh and Clan Roberton

I think you are correct in thinking Clan Donnachaidh and Clan Roberton are separate clans with only a similarity in name. A place is reserved for a future Clan Roberton article on the Template:Scottish clans under Armigerous clans. A point of reference would be web.archive.org. Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 13:47, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect from WP Scottish Clans, "Seeking advice on COI before being bold"

An article on the Roberton Family would also flesh out the ancestry of Earls of Lambington (the progenitors of each family were brothers) ,Coutts( descended from the Roberton Lords of Bedlay) , Lord_Cochrane(his Grandmother was a Roberton of Earnock),William Cullen(his mother was a Roberton),

Anyways is this notable enough for at least a stub, or is it a genealogical flight of fancy? If the consensus is that its not a notable enough, then I'll let it slide.

notable, yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 14:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Please be aware of our civility policy, at WP:CIVIL. Showing someone "the door," is not civil, and should not be repeated. Further, Wikipedia permits anonymous and psuedononimous comment. Do not engage in rudeness to people because they choose not to disclose their name. Thanks. Hipocrite (talk) 17:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Democrats

Dear Paul:

Congratulations on your efforts to update the Australian Democrats entry. I am only a relatively inexperienced wikipedia editor, but I will attempt to make some suggestions soon.

Regards, Jim Page Jamessmithpage (talk) 06:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paul, what you have done so far is great. I'm sorry I haven't had more time to assist. There are a number of good articles on where the dems support comes from - but I'll also be writing an academic kinda article on that soon, so if you leave that bit to me I should be able to put it together for you. Agree keep it simple - not sure about the whole project thing - that's beyond my level of wikipedia knowledge - feel free to lead the way, whatever you think is best. --Kathoc (talk) 07:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne Rebels

I do think that they may try and tie it back, but the VRU are actually only stakeholders with direct interest in the new franchise. Harold Mitchells consortium fully owns the franchise and it is not a direct descendant from the old melbourne rebels team. It is also more likely that the team will officially be known simply as the rebels (sponsorship purposes) and the Rebel Army and a post on theroar.com.au both concluded, even simply as hardline supporters, that they would all insist on it being referred to as the victorian rebels, as the super rugby comp is provincial based. sorry if i sound a bit opiniative and if i offend thats my nature check out my articles http://www.theroar.com.au/author/rugbyfuture/, i understand your position and i think it is important to start noting the movements of this consortium in a history section, from the day it was handed over, the best way to do this is by developing it, as it happens. if im wrong, then we can reintegrate the page back at a later date.--Hatgreg (talk) 13:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree with you on that, its probably most likely people will look for it as the melbourne rebels.--Hatgreg (talk) 14:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Franchise Area section of the Melbourne Rebels article

I did plan to cite a few sources and move away from writing in a prose style. There is a multitude of material and so many angles that have been taken by journalists writing about the 15 a-side code moving into an area that has rugby league side that is dominant in the domestic competition, and grown a large and loyal fan-base from that success. There is also the very recent history of soccer in the area, coupled with the success of the socceroos. Lastly Victoria being the home of Aussie Rules. I think I'll be able to come up with a few sources from all of those angles that the journo's have already written about. On the Danny Cipriani signing; he will be successful as long as he is given free reign. He is a 10 who does not play to a pre-written game plan, nor a typical structured game. He will be, in my opinion, better suited to the more free-flowing southern hemisphere rugby union. He is a rugby league five-eighth, playing his own game, in a forwards dominated English game, that is why he hasn't played for England for quite some time, and now he is moving down-under, it will be quite some time before he plays at Twickenham for England again. All said a very good marquee signing.This deal is getting worse all the time. (talk) 12:36, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne Heart

Agree that the edits to add the link are in good faith but it has been re-added at least 6 times now so I guess I was a bit unnecessarily blunt with the guidelines. If they'd like to write a well referenced supporters section then that could be a great addition to the article, but in general this is one of the worst parts of existing A-League team articles as it is a magnet for original research and non-neutral points of view so it needs to be done carefully. Camw (talk) 14:57, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've left a note replying to my original note that I hope is a bit more positive. I'll check out the Stadium talk page but to be honest it sounds rather painful! Camw (talk) 15:11, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Democrats howler

Hi. Someone edited this comment into the Australian Democrats article here around December 22 last when I wasn't watching. <! Greatest respect to Don Chipp, but he wasn't a Senator>. The uninformed editor created some unfortunate errors which stood in Wikipedia for three months until I corrected them yesterday and today. I'm surprised you didn't pick it up when working on the section. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 08:21, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Proberton/archive1&oldid=353521188"