User talk:Exiledone

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:9780140446586HTheVillageofStepanchikovo.jpg}

Thank you for uploading Image:9780140446586HTheVillageofStepanchikovo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flap Jack Kerouac

Apologies for reverting your edit on Jack Kerouac. Myself and a few others are looking to make Kerouac a featured article and as such were debating (for a litte while) on whether or not to delete the section you contributed to and reached a consensus to do just so. We're planning on moving the information into a well cited Influences and Legacy sections on the model of J. R. R. Tolkien. I can't recall what it is you put just now, but just find some good references and add it to the new section. And if you're a fan of Kerouac's, please, help us make it a featured article, so Jack can get the credit he deserves. --Leodmacleod 4:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence

Hello. I'm contacting you and other members of WikiProject Books in order to find if you are interested in collaborating to expand and improve The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence article to make it worthy of becoming a featured article candidate, in light of the fact that it is the first book the U.S. government ever went to court to censor before its publication. --Loremaster (talk) 22:15, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:N47697.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:N47697.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:VillageMagazineheadr1c1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:VillageMagazineheadr1c1.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 07:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Billy Leonard

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Billy Leonard, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

See WP:POLITICIAN. Councillors and parliamentary candidates are generally not notable.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, 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. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 18:32, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Paddy Prenderville

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Paddy Prenderville, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Editor of a magazine with under 20k circulation? Not notable.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, 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. Scott Mac (Doc) 14:04, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Paddy Prendeville

I have nominated Paddy Prendeville, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paddy Prendeville. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Scott Mac (Doc) 00:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Exiledone! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 314 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Michael Howard (civil servant) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Ger Colleran - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Michael Curtis (pathologist) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--72.171.0.140 (talk) 17:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Michael Curtis (pathologist)

The article Michael Curtis (pathologist) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Apparently not notable, no references, subject is a professional but does not have significant coverage in reliable sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Nuujinn (talk) 18:54, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Irish general election, 1981 - Anti H-Block candidates

Hi there, do you know of a reference for the list of Anti H-Block candidates in the Irish general election, 1981? ElectionsIreland.org isn't reliable in this instance. Rgds, Snappy (talk) 00:13, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They were listed in a book I'm reading called Down Down Deeper and Down: Ireland in the 70's and 80's by Eamonn Sweeney. I used electionsireland as a source because the percentages tallied roughly with the ones given in the book along with the names. E.I. is a balls however because they list them as independent which is why I can understand the fact that it isn't reliable. The only other online sources are this http://www.politico.ie/index.php?option=com_magazine&func=show_edition&id=312 (go to pg22) and this http://www.irishhungerstrike.com/endstatement.html.

Exiledone (talk) 12:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. BrownHairedGirl has a printed source in Walker's Parliamentary election results in Ireland 1918–1992. See also - this discussion. Snappy (talk) 12:21, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hello, Exiledone. You have new messages at Snappy's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Snappy (talk) 22:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

County Londonderry

Concerning this edit, you have been asked before to refrain from altering references to County Londonderry to read County Derry. As you know this is the community consensus, and there has never been a County Derry in the history of Ireland. Canterbury Tail talk 11:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs

Hi, would you care to comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kieran Dennison and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eoghan Murphy? Rgds, Snappy (talk) 21:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fingal coco info box.

Nice work. And quick too. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Baronies of Ireland.

What's your beef with the baronies (see - Clonmel)? There is extensive coverage and discussion on their use in the WikiProject:Ireland discussion pages. Suffice to say, that their use is allowed in the last line of the lead of an article. Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They're not a legal entity first of all IMO. Id like to see that so called "extensive" coverage on their use.

Exiledone (talk) 22:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are several examples (both current and archived) here. See also Barony (Ireland) for current legal usage. Laurel Lodged (talk) 23:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anglo-Irish Treaty

I've replaced my text that you removed in Anglo-Irish Treaty under plenipotentiaries, para 2 - "Unfortunately the Dáil did not meet again until after the Treaty was signed, and so was not informed of the effective alteration of their status in the meantime." It was unfortunate, in that the change of emphasis when the Dail next met in December 1921 led on to the civil war. Or maybe you think it was fortunate?Red Hurley (talk) 12:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

infobox

sorry, using non-english names in italics, generally done (other times with sucess_ on such articles.Lihaas (talk) 01:48, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"returns" & "English" amendments.

Why was this amendment reverted ? Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:56, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary and given the comment on your talk page I'm very doubtful about you.

Exiledone (talk) 15:58, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Scurrilous comment on my talk page is irrelevant. Why was "elects" necessary but "returns" not necessary? Why was the "in English" deletion not necessary? Did it not occur to you that TD is Irish, not English, so how could TD be common in English. It's usage is just plain common, not "common in English". Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:02, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its a commonly used phrase in English for gods sake. And why the change from return to elects? Elects makes more sense and is more frequently used in Ireland.

Exiledone (talk) 16:04, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that's TD is a commonly used phrase: that's what the article read before you changed it. It is not, however, a commonly used English phrase. Your reversion introduced an error which you should correct. A constituency does not elect: the people elect. A constituency merely "returns" a deputy. The terminology is more correct. Unless you propose to re-order the sentence to "The people of Dublin West currently elect 4 deputies....", then you should correct your error. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:28, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can say the constituency elects four tds for gods sake.

Exiledone (talk) 18:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course you can. But ask yourself, which is more correct? And what abount "in English"? Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:28, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Explain to me, if you can, what part of the forecoming exchange led you to believe that I would consent to you reverting - for the second time - the "returns" and the "in English" in all the constituency articles? This is not how things are done on Wiki. If you felt aggrieved by my positon, there are several dispute resoltion options open to you; you used none. Please tell me why i should not report your behaviour. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:39, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In all honesty I don't remember doing that.

Exiledone (talk) 19:48, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very well then. I'll restore them. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:14, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was the one who changed returns to elects because it clearly is an election. I remember voting in one recently. Please leave the word "elects" in the article. Its common usage and common sense. I did not re-add the in English bit. Snappy (talk) 21:38, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Whelan

Bit ahead of yourself with this article. This count is still going on, and if Feeney votes split a certain way, the FFers will get in ahead of Whelan. Snappy (talk) 22:35, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, there is a glaring error in the intro. Snappy (talk) 22:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Luckily, Whelan just got elected beating Donie "The Rug" Cassidy. Snappy (talk) 23:00, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saves deleting it so.

Mary Holland

Hi. I am just letting you know straight up that I updated the Mary Holland article. Some of your editing was not in keeping with WP:NPOV. Yours, Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 19:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No bother with that. Tbh I find it very hard to be neutral when describing someone of the calibre of Conor Cruise O'Brien. Just glad you kept in that memo he

sent her, which in my opinion gives a good insight into his mindset. Exiledone (talk) 21:53, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Places in Clare

As promised I have started checking out the places out of the template. The results are here: User:Eddylandzaat/Clare Eddylandzaat (talk) 23:04, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is checked now. List is now also a joblist that I will tick off the coming weeks. Like to here your comments. Especially where we don't agree... Eddylandzaat (talk) 01:58, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Elliott Page

Hi Exiledone! I see the changes that you have made to the Tom Elliott page. I have reverted these changes as I believe that these both provide context to non-expert readers of the page, as the comment about the GAA sports body's ban on security force participation seems to be the reason why Elliott refuses to attend their events judging by the coverage that I have read, and the fact that the Provisional IRA are a proscribed terrorist group explains the context of the comments in that incident. As this is an online encyclopaedia read by people with varying degrees of knowledge on the subject, I think these comments are relevant.

Rather than constant changes to the page, I have added a section to the [| Tom Elliott Talk Page] where this can be discussed and hopefully a consensus can be achieved.

Hope that is helpful. Mr Sheep Measham (talk) 07:00, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gerry Breen

The article Gerry Breen has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. CrossTempleJay talk 11:26, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained changes

Why did you revert my edits to Irish general election, 2011 without giving a reason? AtSwimTwoBirds (talk) 20:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Listen It was agreed beforehand to list the ULA, rather than it's constituent parties along with New Vision alliance. You should've proposed that change on the discussion page.

Exiledone (talk) 20:34, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:The Second Sex book cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Second Sex book cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Carlton Leach

The article Carlton Leach has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Warfieldian (talk) 14:38, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Use of non-free image File:Pietro Nenni.jpg on Italian general election, 1946

The non-free image File:Pietro Nenni.jpg was recently restored to Italian general election, 1946 by you after it have been removed for failure of our non-free content criteria policy, specifically item #10c which requires a "separate, specific non-free use rationale for each use of the item". The image still fails the 10c policy requirement and has been removed from the article again. Please do not restore this image to that article again without complying with the requirements of that policy. For more information on how to write an appropriate non-free use rationale, please consult Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline. If you have questions about this, please ask. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 13:03, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dún Laoghaire photo

Hi Exiledone,

perhaps you can help here: Talk:Dún_Laoghaire#photo

Looking forward to hearing from you,

--YvonneM (talk) 21:12, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]