User talk:Prioryman

Re: King's Bastion

Thanks, will do. Have a good break and Happy Easter! --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 09:39, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Śmigus-Dyngus

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

The Czech version of Śmigus-Dyngus was described in the New York Times c. April 2000 and 10 years later. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:17, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Shitterton

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Brown Willy

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for John le Fucker

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikibreak

My first and only wikifriend on a break? lol. Look forward to your return mate. Ollie DietJustice (talk) 17:49, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:The Mare's Nest.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:The Mare's Nest.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 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:A Night to Remember 1955 edition cover.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:A Night to Remember 1955 edition cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:10, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Icelandic Phallological Museum logo.gif

Thank you for uploading File:Icelandic Phallological Museum logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:06, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bare Faced Messiah US cover.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Bare Faced Messiah US cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:10, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bare Faced Messiah UK paperback cover.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Bare Faced Messiah UK paperback cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:10, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Titanic musical Broadway poster.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Titanic musical Broadway poster.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:11, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

GA Nom for The Hole

Howdy- I have reviewed your nomination for The Hole to become a good article. I did not feel it currently met the requirements. You can find my review here. Please feel free to ask any questions you have on my talk page. I hope I wasn't too generic on the review page. Thank you. PrairieKid (talk) 02:57, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

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

PrairieKid (talk) 16:34, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Gibraltar DYK questions

In answer to your questions: honestly, I can't answer them. I haven't kept myself up to date with the situation with Gibraltarpedia, so I'm not sure whether or not it's still a problem and what kind of conditions would be appropriate. My initial instinct, though - if there was another RFC tomorrow - would be to take the same position, unless someone could demonstrate that the problem has been satisfactorily resolved. Robofish (talk) 20:23, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, that raises the question of what constitutes a "satisfactory resolution". What would you personally be looking for? Prioryman (talk) 20:24, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Answered your questions at User talk:Kaldari#Lifting the Gibraltar DYK restrictions. Cheers. Kaldari (talk) 21:37, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I broadly agree with Kaldari. Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I replied on my talk page. I think it's probably time, but I would need to do more research before saying that without qualification. Tazerdadog (talk) 06:14, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

@Prioryman: - From my vantage point, Gibraltarpedia is a PR disaster for Wikipedia and along the lines of the John Seigenthaler incident a few years back. Happenings like this undermine the project's credibility. You asked: (1) under what conditions you would support a lifting of the restrictions, and (2) when you think it would be appropriate to lift the restrictions? There are no easy answers to those questions. I see it as fighting cancer. If we release the restrictions early (i.e. stop treatment thinking we've eradicated the cancer), it could reemerge, and possibly more virulent than the first iteration. While I understand there are several good editors working on Gibraltar-related projects that deserve recognition, it's hard to balance that with the abuse--as the abuse was quite deliberate. So, the short answers to your questions (1) when we can be sure this madness won't re-rear its ugly head, when the restrictions can be loosened in a way that allow recognition of Gibraltar-related content without it being a massive, coordinated overwhelming campaign to promote Gibraltar by pushing it everywhere often. I am not sure it's possible. If we're still talking about it, the problem is still lurking--the cancer isn't yet in remission. (2) a year might be the appropriate time to reexamine it. No guarantees, no hard-set dates. As with Afghanistan, the US announces a date of leaving, the Taliban just sits biding their time. --ColonelHenry (talk) 11:22, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Slowking made a proposal on my talk page to transition the restrictions to being place-neutral (rather than removing them completely or leaving them indefinitely). This sounds like a good compromise. Basically saying that no one location can be heavily "promoted" on DYK. For example, if an article about Zanzibar appears on DYK in April, no further Zanzibar articles can be used on DYK until May. Thoughts? 17:12, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

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

• I would venture to say that begins to look acceptable--I'd have to see more about it before fully agreeing. For instance, is this like a 45-day period between place-specific DYKs? Because that seems like a reasonable number. Given the number of places in this world, 30 seems too small, too frequent, and I'd be bold and say 60 days would be prohibitively long. --ColonelHenry (talk) 12:24, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

• I guess you didn't see my reply on Kaldari's user talk page. Briefly, I pointed out that this would be politically unsellable and logistically very difficult. There's no general acceptance that "over-coverage" is a problem. For instance, we've had 85 DYKs on Gibraltar in the last year, compared to 115 on Indonesia, 112 on mushrooms, 277 on the Olympics or 128 on the Paralympics (see the table at User:Prioryman/DYK data). Nobody has complained that we've had too many on any topic other than Gibraltar. A new and drastic restriction is unsellable to the community at large without any agreement that there is any kind of a problem. On the logistical side, given that there are over 600 DYKs a month it would be a huge task to log and monitor every DYK that runs to track whether a particular topic (defined how and by who?) is being "over-covered" (at what threshold?). Nobody is likely to volunteer for such an onerous job. Prioryman (talk) 18:56, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

• I see your point. So, let me take a day or two and reacquaint myself with the issues again, see what progress has been made since then, see a few other opinions on it, and I'll let you know. Personally, I think the issue was overblown. But before I change my opinion on the matter, I think the big concern is "will it happen again?" and if I have an inkling of foresight that this nonsense will be back or worse back at a fever pitch, I can't in good conscience endorse a lifting of the restrictions. If I see that the abuse is over and likely to stay over, I can endorse a lifting. So let me look into it, I'll let you know by the weekend.--ColonelHenry (talk) 20:52, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
• as for the comparison to the Olympics and Paralympics, I think the analysis is off (statistics is my day job) and that the data you offer is skewed by outliers...namely august and september last year when the Olympics and Paralympics were being held and thus there was an salient and justifiable interest in them. In the interests of Heteroscedasticity, you should disclaim that, and adjust the data to reflect that analysis. However, I see your more central point and I will consider it. All those mushroom DYKs, and none on Amanita phalloides. For shame. --ColonelHenry (talk) 21:00, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

• There's no hurry - there's no active discussion about the restrictions and I expect it will be some months before anyone proposes to lift them again. But could you clarify what you mean by "will it happen again?" What is the "it" that you are referring to? Regarding the stats, I included the Olympics and Paralympics as examples of DYK surges that were being prompted by outside events. The Indonesian and mushroom articles were, if I recall correctly, the work of single very prolific editors. The number of Gibraltar DYKs were being spurred by a contest that ended in December 2012. As far as I know there's no plan for any future contest, and a number of editors have said that they'd want a guarantee of that from the organisers of Gibraltarpedia. Prioryman (talk) 21:56, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

• By "it" I mean anything like Gibraltarpedia--a contest, or a drive coordinated by selfish interests from outside wikipedia (like a tourism board, company, interest group, etc.), anything that will undermine the Wikipedia project's credibility because of its less than pure origins. In this instance, "it" specifically refers to the Gibraltarpedia project...will we have any repeat of this experience? Is it like the Taliban waiting for the US to withdraw? From what I see (in other conversations and the discussion with Kaldari, I observe that you're only with the WikiProject and not the Gibraltarpedia initiative, so I sympathize with your plight. As long as you can assuage that overwhelming concern, I'd support your efforts to rescind the restrictions--heck if that concern is answered, I'd propose it myself.--ColonelHenry (talk) 23:13, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

• OK, I'll see what I can do to answer that concern. Thanks for all your feedback. Prioryman (talk) 07:35, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

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

Link to FBI seal discussion?

Hi. I remember the FBI seal discussion, but don't know where to find it. If you do, could you possibly add a link to the straw poll preamble, please? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 02:17, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, certainly. Prioryman (talk) 06:18, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks :) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 11:35, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Just as well that I didn't suggest asking the Lord Privy Seal. . . dave souza, talk 11:45, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Possibly the most singularly misnamed job title ever? He's not a privy, not a seal, and he doesn't seal privies... Prioryman (talk) 18:58, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Gibraltar (Wilmington, Delaware)

Hi-I notice that a draft about Gibraltar (Wilmington, Delaware) is at User Doncram's user page. I was wondering if the article is ready to be put on the mainpage? I had asked Doncram about it and received no response. I knew you worked on the article. Thanks-RFD (talk) 12:48, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

This is about User:Doncram/Gibraltar (Wilmington, Delaware). The draft was discussed at User talk:Doncram#Great minds think alike, etc (with some DYK nom discussion), and there is more DYK nom discussion at User talk:Doncram/Gibraltar (Wilmington, Delaware), and then yes RFD brought it up again at User talk:Doncram#Gibraltar (Wilmington, Delaware). Prioryman, I would be very happy if you chose to move it to mainspace. I can't move it myself. The article is obviously DYK-eligible and you could make any DYK nomination. If you notify me of the DYK nomination going on, I would comment and/or try to improve any DYK phrasing. I haven't much developed the User:Doncram/Marian Cruger Coffin article draft, but if you like that could be moved to mainspace too, with or without it being included in the DYK. It would probably make sense to clear the redlink from the Gibraltar article by having it in mainspace, either way. I like your double DYK hook #3 suggestion at the Talk page, "... that Gibraltar's gardens (pictured) were laid out by Marian Cruger Coffin, one of America's first female landscape architects?", but to use that requires a bit more development of the Coffin article.

Cheers, --doncram 18:01, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I had quite forgotten that article, if I remember rightly I was looking into expanding the MCC article before moving both into mainspace. I'll try to get something sorted out over the next few days. Prioryman (talk) 21:59, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

What you've done with both articles is great. The two separate DYKs are fine; i have no improvements to suggest. Thanks for including me in the DYK for the Gibraltar one, and for leaving me out of the MCC one--i woulda felt funny getting undeserved credit. It's nice getting to learn a bit about you, prioryman, i am very impressed. I don't expect it will come up, but please let me know in the future if i can be helpful in any way. Cheers, --doncram 23:17, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Glad you like them! I might have a go at getting them up to Good Article status next; I think they're pretty close to that level, so it shouldn't be too difficult to do. Prioryman (talk) 23:19, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for List of sieges of Gibraltar

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Sock identification

Hi. You just marked a blocked account (with a BLP-breaching username which I will not repeat here) as a sock of Shellys Revenge (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). You should note that this account has already been blocked as a Runtshit sock. Any further such vandalism on Amiram Goldblum is almost certainly the work of this serial vandal. RolandR (talk) 17:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the info. There's a sockmaster's name that I've not heard in quite a while... Prioryman (talk) 17:51, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Then you've clearly not been editing where I have. Unfortunately, he has not gone away. RolandR (talk) 17:56, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Maybe if there were a substantial Palestinian community in Gibraltar then things would be different? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:23, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

There's a substantial North African community, but that's a bit different... Prioryman (talk) 07:28, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Mare's Nest

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipediocracy HQ

Prioryman, the Wikipediocracy HQ may be underground, but it's definitely not fetid. WO being funded by aliens after all, there was no reason to spare any expense on the HQ complex. Imagine how much it must have cost to pull fiber optics to that island - do you really that alien masterminds would forget about proper ventilation? 178.222.143.75 (talk) 06:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Gibraltar (Wilmington, Delaware)

Many thanks-RFD (talk) 23:12, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Marian Cruger Coffin

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Holding area hooks

Prioryman, I noticed you'd been by my page; I stopped by the Gibraltar holding area, commented, and moved the hook into the "fully approved" section.

There's still one hook languishing there: CITIPEG. Can I ask you to take it in hand? I pulled it from the prep area at your behest, and Soman has subsequently asked what can be done to make it eligible for promotion. Thanks for anything you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:17, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me - I'll try to sort it out tonight. Prioryman (talk) 07:24, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/List of sieges of Gibraltar at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 09:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks

Many thanks to you for bringing up the Gibraltar (Wilmington, Delaware) article. A family member saw the house and gardens and was wondering about the history. On the Gibraltar DYK issue, there has been too much wikidrama and has been going on for a long time. I wish it would end. Many thanks again-RFD (talk) 10:33, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

GA nomination for Seneb

Hi, I've been doing the review for your GA nomination of Seneb. As GA reviewing is something I'm very new at, I have asked Khazar2 to have a quick look as well and a couple of points have been raised that it would be fine if you could have a look at, please. By the way, what a fascinating article and some very interesting reference books - that I spent far too much time browsing through! Thanks. SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Gibraltar (Wilmington, Delaware)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

ADE 651

Hi Prioryman. I see this is currently a candidate for ITN. Do you support? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind, but as the main author of the article I think I'm probably too closely involved for it to be appropriate for me to vote for it. Prioryman (talk) 21:12, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

That explains why I didn't see you voting! I'm strongly minded to support. I'm just put off by accusations of sensationalism. But this is a very grim day indeed for British business and reputation in general. It's almost unbelievable. Martinevans123 (talk)

It's certainly one of the most outrageous frauds I've ever heard of. Unfortunately he can't go down for longer than 7 years, the maximum sentence for fraud. Prioryman (talk) 21:22, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bring Seneb to Good Article status. Thanks, and keep up the good work - this was a truly fascinating article! -- SagaciousPhil - Chat 09:54, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

adjectives at Battle of Vukovar

Do you still have a copy of the Independent article to verify this change? Also, I can't trivially verify this change because Google Books only shows a snippet for those pages. It does find the phrase "Milošević's authoritarian and centralizing tendencies inside Serbia" at p. 307 of the same book, though. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:55, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Prioryman. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is DYK.
Message added 18:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 18:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I've replied on your talk page. Prioryman (talk) 22:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Twelfth Siege of Gibraltar

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	Gibraltar Barnstar of National Merit
	For yet another great Gibraltar-related article! Looking forward to any more you may have planned... Keep up the awesome work! :) --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 20:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Siege of Gibraltar

I've let you a message in Talk:Twelfth Siege of Gibraltar. --Weymar Horren (talk) 11:27, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

En català!

Hi Chris, you may have noticed History of Gibraltar is now available in Catalan. Al Lemos has just done the intro for the moment, but it's something. --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 08:52, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Scientology clarification request closed

Hi Prioryman, this is a courtesy notice to inform you that the request for clarification you submitted regarding Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Scientology has been closed and archived. You can view the original discussion here, and the archived copy here. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:04, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Prioryman. You have new messages at Gilderien's talk page.
Message added 18:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 18:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Rose

Hey, do you have access to Rose (2001; "Military Engineering on the Rock of Gibraltar and its Geoenvironmental Legacy")? Somebody pointed out that I lack the page range for Rose's chapter for the list of sieges. Btw, I'm going to start drafting a total rewrite of Operation Flavius soon (though it might be a few weeks before I have anything online). Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I do, though not immediately to hand - I can get it at the British Library though. Prioryman (talk) 16:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

If you could find me the page numbers for that chapter, I'd owe you pint! :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:30, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

3rd opinion request

Hi Prioryman, could I ask if you could give a 3rd opinion to this discussion at DYK please? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 21:31, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Adventure Galley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mughal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Neanderthals of Gibraltar

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

ITN credit

ThaddeusB (talk) 20:40, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion for Implicit personality theory hook

Thanks for reviewing Implicit personality theory. I think the new hook is great but I made one small adjustment. If you could give it a look and let me know what you think that'd be great! Lrague (talk) 22:48, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Adventure Galley

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:30, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

A great article, btw - nice work! Hchc2009 (talk) 21:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I spotted it in WP:TAFI on the Main Page and thought I'd have a go at it - I have a soft spot for that particular ship due to far too many hours playing Sid Meier's Pirates!... Prioryman (talk) 21:50, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Twelfth siege of Gibraltar

Hi! There's just a little tweaking needed to pass the Talk:Twelfth Siege of Gibraltar/GA1 review, so I thought to ping you in case you didn't notice that before.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:45, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for letting me know! I'll take a look now. Prioryman (talk) 20:47, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Jimbo's talkpage

This is quite clearly a violation of WP:NPA ("Using someone's affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views") and so I have removed it. Black Kite (talk) 22:33, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

How very tiresome of you. Prioryman (talk) 22:35, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Very possibly, but you're clearly aware that there are ways of getting your point across about Wikipediocracy without resorting to that. Black Kite (talk) 22:36, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

WP:SPADE, in spades. Prioryman (talk) 22:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Photo of the Northern Defences

Hi Chris, as promised. It's not a perfect match as I think I would have had to break into the Petanque Association's premisses on North Bastion to have achieved this and it's all overgrown but I think it should still work to show the then and now... --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 09:29, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Ty, that's great! Prioryman (talk) 10:28, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: Can you identify this place?

Yep, that's Princess Anne's Battery. --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 10:02, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Prioryman (talk) 10:03, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Any time ;) --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 10:25, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: Tunnels

That would be awesome! Someone posted a whole list of tunnels on the WP Gib to-do list but many of these are only small streets within a wider tunnel system. Furthermore, the article on the Great Siege Tunnels is only about the Upper Galleries which is the popular tourist attraction known as the Great Siege Tunnels but the Lower Galleries including Windsor Gallery are also part of this system excavated during the Great Siege.

The vast majority of the WWII tunnels are still MoD property though some such as the Great North Road system can be visited by prior arrangement. Although most of the original amenities within these are in a terrible state of decay, the tunnels are still used for storage and training purposes. More recently for training troops destined to Iraq and Afghanistan in underground warfare. Some say that modern tunnel maps still don’t show all of them for security purposes…

MoD (surface) land on the Upper Rock is now pretty much limited to the north peak of the Rock which does include Rock Gun Battery but many of those signs are indeed leftovers – for some reason it takes years to have old signage removed in Gib! The MoD would also still own any of the batteries in the Buffadero Traning Centre on Windmill Hill and maybe some within parts of the dockyard. I’ll ask a few people to give you a more precise answer. --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 09:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Fortifications of Gibraltar

Chris, this is turning out to be another great article. I always struggle with overview articles as I never know how much detail is acceptable but you always seem to strike the right balance!

Just have a comment on the following:

"The Moorish Tower of Homage continues to stand above the Grand Battery on the lower slopes of the Rock. Used for many years as Gibraltar's prison, it is now open to the public as part of the Upper Rock Nature Reserve.[86]"

HMP Moorish Castle occupied the castle's inner keep (the Moorish Castle Estate occupies the outer keep) and extended past the castle's southern limits but I don't think it ever included the Tower of Homage (at least not in my lifetime). Since the opening of the new HMP Windmill Hill the more modern buildings within the inner keep are being demolished by hand while archaeological excavations are carried out. The area has never been excavated so hoping they'll find some exciting stuff in there! The idea is to then open this area of the castle to the public as part of the existing attraction. Hope this clarifies a little. --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 11:42, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Coffin

Really enjoyed reading this article. Nothing to say for GA review except I think the lead is too short, needs to reflect structure of the article. The template at the end should have a landscape gardening section, too, but that's another matter. All the best, - Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the article, it's a pleasure to review material like this. I'm enjoined to encourage you to review some GAN articles, some of mine have been languishing in the queue for months! Not that I'd want you to review those, obviously. All the best - Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:03, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Map

Thanks for the map Chris, its a lot prettier than the previous one but not quite as useful as I think there is a "key" to it, but I cannot find it. The previous map converted a lot of sub-stubs into articles that at least tell you something about the battery in 1859. The work is looking very good and I'm wondering if "1000 by Utrecht Day" sounds do-able. If Dr B is watching ?? Victuallers (talk) 17:03, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I think you'll find that another map I've uploaded, File:Plan de Gibraltar - Barbié du Bocage.jpg, is even prettier - and it's annotated. Another useful source? But the reason why I uploaded File:Plan de Gibraltar A H Roché.jpg was precisely because it's not annotated. See what I've done with it below... (a work in progress). Prioryman (talk) 19:50, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Lines of
Contravallation

Devil's Tower ——

Inundation ——

Landport & Grand Battery ——

North Bastion ——

Devil's Tongue
Battery

—— Moorish Castle

Charles V Wall

—— Grand
Casemates

/
King's Bastion

Catalan Bay

Willis'
Battery

\
Line Wall

—— Southport Gates

—— South Bastion

New Mole

Rosia Bay

Windmill Hill

Europa
Point

That is interesting Chris, as you may know I have had an interest in imagemaps in the past but I'd lost interest when the images got so large that the tools I was using wouldn't cope. Looks like a lot has changed - I see there are some new tools. I think your image map is superb. The annotated French map you found is very pretty. The one you are using seems to be covered in numbers. Presumably somewhere there is a key in French. The new map shows the Spanish forts very well, monkeys cave and "Hardy Town" (which I hadnt heard mentioned before). The inundation and Windmill Hill seem to be areas where we could do with more detail as well as the big tunnels like Great North Road. We have written 1000 more articles but still not covered some important bits! Not bad for a project that has had to step through so much. Best Victuallers (talk) 09:52, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately the key doesn't seem to have been scanned along with the original map. However, the lack of annotations does at least make it suitable for using as an imagemap! I have some further plans for it which I'll post shortly to Talk:Fortifications of Gibraltar. BTW, I plan to write articles on the Inundation, the Lines of Contravallation and Windmill Hill shortly (hopefully tomorrow, if I get the time). I also have enough info on Hardy Town - a temporary civilian settlement established during the Great Siege - to merit a stub at the very least. Prioryman (talk) 12:05, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Totally agree with Roger, there's still a lot of notable topics yet to cover! I think events such as the border closure and the 1972 general strike are a must, I just need to somehow find the time - argh! The imagemap is pretty cool, gonna have to learn how to do that myself. I spoke to Toromedia yesterday and mentioned to him that you're keen on taking on Tunnels of Gibraltar (this is his pet subject). He's looking forward to it and I'm sure he'll be happy to provide photos. If it helps as a starting point the Spanish Lines has already been written in a few languages including Spanish - see es:Línea de Contravalación de Gibraltar. I've never heard of Hardy Town either. I can't quite make out its exact location but it seems its somewhere in the area of South Barracks, but I'll check with the local historians on the Facebook forums later. --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 12:22, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Just checking that you are aware of Fort Barbara which is the only? substantial remains of the Spanish Lines. Victuallers (talk) 14:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Oddball Barnstar
		"Mothers doing strange things with vegetables do probably explain the disposition of Wikipediocracy's contributors..." For that masterpiece of Freudian surrealism, Prioryman, I honour you with the oddball barnstar. Amazing stuff..! p.s. It's true! We are all fuckwits! -- Hillbillyholiday talk 05:47, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Tsk, you didn't read that link you posted earlier, did you, particularly item 12? I was just riffing on it. P.S. If you say so... Prioryman (talk) 07:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Fwiw, I'm rather impressed by your work on Gibraltar articles. It's quite professional. Maybe you should stick to content improvement, instead of making wild accusations elsewhere? Just a suggestion. -- Hillbillyholiday ^talk 22:03, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

My talk page

[1] I believe you banned me from your talk page last year sometime. However, over the last three months you have posted quite frequently to my talk page when I was in a position in which I could not respond. To be fair, I told you at the time that you banned me that you were still more than welcome to post to my talk page. I think, however, it would be more helpful if you posted on my page when I am able to respond. Also, now that I'm unblocked, it isn't necessary for you to revert any posts to my talk page made by others, but I appreciate your attention. Cheers. Cla68 (talk) 22:51, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikipediocracy

Prioryman, please refrain from making personal attacks (or highly uncivil remarks) about Wikipediocracy and its contributors (individually or as a group). It violates WP:NPA (if not always the letter, then at least the spirit), and doesn't help at all. Raising concrete and serious problems at (e.g.) an RfC/U, an RfA, ANI discussions, ... is of course perfectly allright (if they have a relation with Wikipedia, which is usually the case of course), but some of the comments you made in e.g. the DYK discussion were not acceptable on Wikipedia.

Note that I will not take any admin action against you (if and when that would be necessary) as I'm involved in earlier, unrelated discussions with you; note also that this post doesn't indicate that you are the only problem or that I take a position in the Wikipediocracy discussions. Fram (talk) 08:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Tell you what, why don't you get them to refrain from attacking me, then I might not feel the need to be so harsh about them. Prioryman (talk) 09:05, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

If they attack you on Wikipediocracy, then so what? Just don't read it, or read it and ignore it (I'm not talking about actual threats and so on, just regular personal attacks). They have different rules than we do, and we don't suddenly start applying their rules of conduct instead of ours because we are discussing them. If they attack you on Wikipedia, use the normal methods of WP:DR. Don't lower Wikipedia to the level of Wikipediocracy. Fram (talk) 09:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that what they are doing on Wikipediocracy bleeds across to here. After someone on Wikipediocracy started posting bullshit conspiracy theories about why I'd written a number of articles about Gibraltar, I started being harassed and attacked here by Wikipediocracy members like Carrite and Jayen466. Some non-Wikipediocracy members (who evidently read it) also started picking up the same claims and bringing them up here on Wikipedia. Just look at the top of Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 93#Gibraltar for a very recent example. Moreover, as I'm sure you're well aware, a number of unscrupulous Wikipedians "in good standing" [sic] use Wikipediocracy as a means of sidestepping Wikipedia's policies against harassment, outing and personal attacks. If what happens on Wikipediocracy stayed on Wikipediocracy it wouldn't be so much of an issue, but taking a "turn the other cheek" approach doesn't work if someone is punching you in the face. If people are behaving like evil little shits, they deserve to be called out for it. Prioryman (talk) 10:31, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

You are aware that "turn the other cheek" is explicitly referring to how one responds to physical violence inflicted upon one's face are you not? Indeed, the very nature of the phrase suggests one should allow repeated injury to the face rather than resorting to retaliatory violence.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 23:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I'm quite aware of that, but I think it's unrealistic. The "Chicago way" is a better reflection of how it works in real life. Prioryman (talk) 23:35, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Certainly, non-violence, being the quality of the heart, cannot come by an appeal to the brain, so I can understand how a dedicated rationalist may find it hard to respond to physical force with soul force. However, if man is to evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation then the foundation of such a method is love. Peace mah brutha!--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 23:54, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I once made an argument not unlike that to a brigadier at a dinner party many years ago. He put two fingers together, put them to my head and said, "Bang". A simple point, but a powerful one. Prioryman (talk) 23:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

A baby put one finger out, and started tapping her father's forehead. "How do you like it?" Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:43, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

(tps) Prioryman should be extended considerable leeway regarding his characterization of Wikipediocracy, given the way he's treated there, and here for that matter, by some Wikipediocracy regulars. Suggesting he just not read it is, well, silly. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:45, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Speaking from experience, turning the other cheek does work. Once they've punched you twice in the face and got no reaction, most people give up. -- Hillbillyholiday ^talk 00:07, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

• A quote on Wikipediocracy: "Anyway, I am a contributor, and I'm not sorry about that. Wikipediocracy fills a necessary role, and it fills it rather well." -- Larry Sanger@Wikipediocracy (25 May 2013)

Re: More fortification-related articles

Thanks Chris these are looking great. Sorry for the delay, been caught up with Gibraltar Football Association's acceptance into UEFA and I'm not even a football fan! Will add infoboxes, check links, etc. Good job on uploading those detailed maps too! Still intrigued by Hardy Town... --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 17:24, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your continued help! You may wish to see User:Prioryman/Hardy Town, Gibraltar. Prioryman (talk) 18:23, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. I got some info and maps from some local historians on the various Gib history Facebook groups. Let me know if you're on Facebook so I can provide you with the links. --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 08:42, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

No idea but I'll enquire. My suspicion though is that it was never really abandoned with the area possibly having been taken over entirely by the military. If I'm correct about Hardy Town's location being in the area of Mount Road then that would sort of make sense considering The Mount was built there in 1797... --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 11:50, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I think it was further south than that. We know from the sources and maps that it was behind the naval hospital. If you look at File:Plan of Gibraltar.jpg and compare it to the map on my Hardy Town draft, the location matches pretty closely to approximately this area on Europa Road. The French map shows something called Santa Rosia (a church?) next to it to the north, do you know what that is and if it's still there? Prioryman (talk) 12:25, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

You're absolutely right! Tito Vallejo has just posted a 1782 map in the History of Gibraltar Facebook group in reply to my queries which depicts large areas of encampment behind the Old Naval Hospital. I'm now pretty sure the building labelled Ste Rosia in the French map surrounded by gardens/fields is actually The Mount as it's located directly behind South Barracks (Caserne). Not sure why Barbié du Bocage would have labelled Ste Rosia though so I'll ask around again... --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 19:02, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't know if you could see the image in the link I provided above but here's another showing the Hardy Town surrounded by Garrison Encampments. --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 22:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that's really interesting stuff! Now if only we can narrow down when Hardy Town was abandoned/demolished... Prioryman (talk) 22:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Notice

Sources which may or may not be reliable, which you have discussed here, have become the subject of a Request for Clarification of the ArbCom proceeding here. You are welcome to participate in the Request for Clarification. regards ... Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 21:13, 29 May 2013 (UTC)