User talk:Spleodrach

Wikipedia:Date_formatting_and_linking_poll

Hi there, Snappy! I noticed that like me, you are opposed to any form of dates autoformatting. However, you did not sign your entry, but that has now been rectified. I would let you know that I have created some userboxes which you might like to add to your userspace to indicate your position. You will find the boxes here. Ohconfucius (talk) 13:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my signing. I have used your 'Lipstick on a Pig' infobox, nice one! Snappy (talk) 13:26, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Celebrity Bainisteoir

The section of the Celebrity Bainisteoir article that says a few words about each of the bainisteoirí does not limit info to their occupation, therefore the edit summary "Sexual orientation is NOT an occupation" makes no sense to me. Mentioning that Nell McCafferty is a lesbian is not treating her sexual orientation in a disrespectful way, nor treating it as a weird thing. Rather, it is encyclopedic, mentioned by the sources used for the article, and relevant in relation to the brief mention about her experience working exclusively with men. McCafferty is, as the source mentions, outspoken about her lesbian identity. There is no reason not to include that fact as a point of information in this article. --Boston (talk) 03:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Nell McCafferty's sexuality is dealt with in her article. None of the other Celebrity Bainisteoirí have there (presumably straight ) sexuality mentioned in their brief bios. Nell McCafferty has been famous in Ireland since the early 70s and was well known as a feminist and journo for many years before she came out. If she first became famous for being a lesbian and was only famous for being one, then maybe it might be acceptable but since she's not, the narrow stereotyping and pigeon-holing are unacceptable. Snappy (talk) 07:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I firmly consider this neither stereotyping and pigeon-holing, but I am willing to give weight to you perceiving it this way. Know that for me, who had never heard of McCafferty, this does make her blurb quite less interesting. --Boston (talk) 11:58, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

What!? She's interesting because she's a lesbian. Anyway, you've lost me there. Says something about you, not sure what though. Snappy (talk) 12:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

• Only IPA allowed for pronunciation guides? Please show me that policy. As I'm sure you know, the majority of readers find IPA inscrutable. The fact that we're able to find "bwin-ish-TYOH-ir" as a verifiable and referenced pronunciation is a boon to the the article. What possible benefit is there to removing this? --Boston (talk) 03:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

You can always learn IPA, its not that hard! The phonetic pronunciation is Hiberno-Irish centric, a person from England or the US or New Zealand would not pronounce "bwin-ish-TYOH-ir" the same way. Even I don't agree with it I'd day "Bon-ish-tore". There is also 3 dialects of the Irish language (Donegal, Galway & Kerry), each with there own pronunciation, so if there is no agreement in the Irish language, what's the point of one phonetic pronunciation for English? "English pronunciation in Wikipedia should be transcribed in such a way that its interpretation does not depend on the reader's accent. For this end, broad transcriptions of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) should be used" - See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (pronunciation) Snappy (talk) 07:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

It's not a matter of ME learning IPA, I didn't say I don't know it. If we can give the majority of readers an approximation of how "Bainisteoir" is pronounced, we should. Irish phonology is so different that most English speakers in the world might look at the word and imagine something like "bane-is-TEE-or". The fact that we can follow "bwin-ish-TYOH-ir" with a reference number is great; just like a fact that says "the woowoo tree grows to be 3000 meters tall" or whatever, it's not an editor saying it, it's the verifiable source that has said it. --Boston (talk) 11:58, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Did you read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (pronunciation)? Because if you had, you would know that makey up pronunciation guides are against wikipedia policy. And as I said before there are 3 different pronunciations in the Irish language. I came across foreign words all the time on wikipedia without a pronunciation but I make a stab at it and get by, better that then fake and incorrect hiberno-english centric one. Snappy (talk) 12:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

A cited pronunciation is considerably different than an editor's own ad hoc creation. I know about the dialects of Irish. This pronunciation is simply useful; let's not over think it. If you want to amend it to say (pronounced "bwin-ish-TYOH-ir" according to one approximation) that sound be fine. And by all means, include IPA as well. --Boston (talk) 12:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

No, lets not litter wikipedia with this crap. Snappy (talk) 12:27, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Also please note: "For English words, transcriptions based on English spelling ("pronunciation respellings") such as /proh-NUN-see-AY-shən/ may be used, but only in addition to the IPA...Ad-hoc descriptions such as "rhymes with both" or "rhymes with paid" may be useful for describing English sounds" - --Boston (talk) 12:23, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, so you have actually ready it now, at last! What you are putting is not "pronunciation respelling", and that is only to be used in addition to IPA, not on its own. Snappy (talk) 12:27, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I haven't spoken to you with even a bit of disrespect. You, on the other hand, have revealed your true colors. If this, rather that amiable discussion, is the tone you prefer, let's end this discussion with me reminding you about the WP:3RR. --Boston (talk) 12:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

My true colours, oh purlease, darling! I don't suffer fools gladly, and if you are the easily offended type then that's too bad, Daphne! I'm only editing here for four years what's this 3RR you speak of?! (btw, that was sarcasm). Anyone, before I remove "bwin-ish-TYOH-ir" again, I'd like to point out that this in violation of wikipedia policy. Please explain as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (pronunciation), why you persist in adding such blatant violations of wikipedia policy to this article? Also, the really sad part about this is, that in certain dialects of Irish (of which you are totally ignorant), Bainisteoir is almost phonetic in English. That makes us and this silly edit war, just about the 2 most saddest people on the planet! Go figure! Snappy (talk) 15:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts

Notice --Boston (talk) 15:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Irish Elections

Dear Snappy, i note you, like me, are interested in Irish politics. I would like to put together all the elections for the Dail together in one thing by party. I have done work up tpot he 1st inter governmental party in ym sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Phil_Nolte/Sandbox and would appreciate if you would be willing to help me with it or your thoughts on it -- Phil Nolte (talk) 13:46, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, that looks like a good idea. I'll help out with the table. Snappy (talk) 02:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template colour schemes

A tag has been placed on Template colour schemes, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Not an article.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.  Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Oops, I don't know how that happened! It is of course a comment on a users talk page. Speedy delete now! Snappy (talk) 02:46, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Photoreq

Talk:Abuse by priests in Roman Catholic orders - (that would be a definite no!) - indeed, well not while actually abusing I suppose. Lol. ww2censor (talk) 15:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I hope it was a copy and paste error, otherwise.... ! Snappy (talk) 10:18, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Template colour schemes

Hi Snappy. You raise a number of points, particularly about my "garish colour schemes", some of which are agreeable, some of which are not. The CB colour scheme is unsuitable so I will not dispute that. But what exactly is wrong with the others? As you say, "one persons tasteful is another persons tasteless", but there appears to have been no problem with the colour schemes before now; they are not political and I cannot see how they are controversial. I generally choose colour schemes which I think work and cannot see how they are offensive. I must all consider users with poor sight which I do indeed bear in mind; this is not particularly difficult for me as I do not possess the strongest of eyesights myself and thus would suspect this is to my own advantage when it comes to choosing colour schemes. I am somewhat offended at your assumption that users with poor sight may be bracketed as "disabled and the elderly", I had not thought myself to belong in either category before now. I can't think why you needed to include "disabled and the elderly" in brackets like that, I am quite aware of what a user with poor sight might appear like in person and, knowing many young people with varying degrees of poor sight, am almost certain they would not all regard themselves as such. Perhaps it would be better to hear from an elderly or disabled citizen on this issue before making assumptions that a) they all have poor eyesight b) their experience of Wikipedia is being destroyed by garish colour schemes concocted by me. I am fairly sure some would be quite upset at this questioning of their capabilities, I for one do not intend to treat elderly or disabled individuals as incapable human beings.

You seem to be particularly worried about The Panel? I would think that even the most severely crippled individual would be able to tell that the collapsible template – positioned on top of another collapsible template as is the case in the programme's article – which when uncollapsed reveals a series of links floating in mid-air is in fact not an incorrectly formatted article? I am quite confident that readers of Wikipedia are a lot more intelligent than you seem to be giving them credit for.

You classify your editing style as that of a WikiFairy – as indeed do I. A WikiFairy is defined as a wiki editor who beautifies Wikipedia by organizing messy articles, improving style, or adding color and graphics. Some WikiFairies create new articles or affect the substantive content of the articles they edit; others enjoy beautifying articles by clearing up confusing footnotes or references, standardizing format, or by organizing images for balance. Their goals are harmony and visual pleasure for articles. I can't quite believe then that we are engaged in a conflict over colour schemes which you appear to be removing because you little more than dislike them?

• "I am quite confident that readers of Wikipedia are a lot more intelligent than you seem to be giving them credit for." Please don't put words in my mouth. I respect Wikipedia readers as much as you do. I didn't mean to offend anyone with poor eyesight by lumping them in with elderly and/or disabled. Sorry for any offence caused.
• Some of your colour schemes make if hard for me to read, and my eyesight is ok. One point you haven't addressed is, what is wrong with the standard / default colour scheme that you feel the need to create other colour schemes on your own? The standard colour scheme is there for a very good reason. So you should have an equally compelling reason to change to a different colour scheme. I've nothing against colour, indeed some time ago I changed one of the Papal templates to a yellow header because the colour is used on the papal flag and because it matched the other papal templates and looked nice when they were all stacked together.

• You have created many colour schemes but they seem curiously random, just whatever you liked on the day. I see no common threads or themes, or planning. Perhaps we could work together to come up with a common colour scheme for all Irish TV program templates. This would provide a visual linking between them, rather than the randomness at present.

Now your other points. None of the programmes on the Channel 6 template are broadcast on 3e. Many of the leftovers were axed at the takeover so it is misleading and incorrect to associate them with 3e. I'm and Adult, Get me outta here! probably does deserve an article, would you care to contribute? I am not to be prompted on what to create; there are hundreds of neglected programmes and I cannot possibly create them all. I generally only add more programmes to the template when they are created, some are not even on it. I am at present concentrating on a heavy backlog of recently finished programmes which it appears will be forgotten unless a surprise user pops up to assist. So it is unlikely I will get to your request soon. --candle•wicke 21:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

• I'll get around to it soon, I've my own backlog of stuff to do as well. Snappy (talk) 02:05, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

The colour schemes are not random. --candle•wicke 02:45, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

They seem pretty random to me. Can you explain? Also, I'm sure you are aware of WP:OWN. Snappy (talk) 02:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm quite aware of it thank you very much. I created them but do not own them. They are all in the public domain. But since I'm the largely the only contributor to them and there is nothing overwhelmingly controversial (apart from the destruction caused to the eyesights of the elderly and disabled) I do not see your point. It comes across as a tad overly fussy. I think you'll find that many are based on colour patterns used by the individual shows. You might, for instance, find some of the colours in the logos. They may not be exact but I was unaware that they had to be perfect or that there was any rush to ensure that they were immediately so until you recently deemed many of them "garish". --candle•wicke 16:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I've obviously touched a nerve here, you may be aware of WP:OWN but you certainly don't like it when another editor touches them. Yes, some of them were garish (no quotes needed), its some constructive feedback for you. Looking at other TV program templates (Fair city, Emmerdale, Eastenders, Holby, Coronation Street, Doctor Who, Star Trek, Neighbours), I see standard colour schemes all round. Yes, there are a few coloured ones. Which brings to a point I made earlier, what is wrong with the standard scheme that makes want to come up with alternative ones? I refer to WP:NAV, "Navigation templates are not arbitrarily decorative, There should be justification for a template to deviate from standard colors and styles". You claim there is some link between your colour schemes and the shows colour patterns. I fail to see much of a connection. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! Snappy (talk) 00:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

How strange, I was just about to use that line... I don't know what nerve (or which part of me) you've touched, I see nothing obvious in the above which indicates that this is so. In fairness, you have listed mainly soap operas, an area I barely have neither the toleration nor the motivation to go into. I know navigation templates are not "arbitrarily decorative", and I have given a justification which is simply not to your taste. You seem unable to recognise basic colours when placed side by side comparatively and it is not my place to tutor you on this matter. If you persistently edit to your own tastes, styles or that which is agreeable to you, I see your NPOV as being potentially questionable. I personally do not see what is broke to fix but you have somehow managed to do just that. Perhaps that is to be congratulated, perhaps it is to be criticised... but evidently my choice of title for this section was also broke for you have taken the liberty to fix that as well... --candle•wicke 18:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, its my talk page and I'll edit how I like, and that includes section headings. You accuse me of editing to my own tastes and styles and this being POV. Lol, I don't think so! Hello Pot, have met Kettle?! What I've actually done is simply used the standard wikipedia template colour schemes which are provided by default and are very widely used. You are the one that is editing with your own random colour schemes because you think they are pretty. I earlier offered to work with you to come up with a common colour scheme(s) for Irish shows, I see that offer has been roundly and rudely thrown back in my face, oh well! Apparently, I can't recognise basic colours when placed sided by side comparatively, well would that the the vomit shade of green on one of the templates or would that be the beautiful and amazing Celebrity Bainisteoir template which used the colour red for all links. So what if wikipedia uses red coloured links for non existent articles, you go ahead and use that colour for all links in your template because its apparently not random and somehow fits with the shows colours and because you have a degree in colourology, that'll be fantastic looking! Once again, you avoided answering a simple question that I asked you. What is wrong with the standard template colour schemes, that you feel to need to inflict your (obviously very tasteful, totally not random) colour schemes on wikipedia? Snappy (talk) 08:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I have not at any point thrown anything "roundly and rudely" back in your face. I have done my utmost to respond in a CIVIL manner to a user I'm finding to be of the most disagreeable variety. I can see I'm not the first to have encountered your wrath but I had not expected this conversation to descend to the level which it seems to have to have now fallen to. I do not think the templates in question are "pretty", I would not be so arrogant as to suggest I have developed a mastery of colour. Which "vomit shade of green" are we talking about precisely? Again I was not under the impression that Wikipedia had to be completed before noon – otherwise I would have ensured that each of my edits were suitable for the completed product, as opposed to any form of experimentation to gain a wider knowledge into what might be most appropriate. You are the only person so far who thinks of them as "random" or "garish" "vomit" – with no consensus I cannot help but sense POV creeping in here somewhere. I am extremely sorry that your tastes have been offended by this most despicable habit I have of vomiting across Wikipedia. I can only hope you will be patient with me and offer your most earnest support as I do my utmost to overcome this burdensome addiction. --candle•wicke 19:38, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I find you incivil too. Your comments here are snide, sarcastic, arrogant and condescending. I offered to help with a new colour scheme and reach consensus, that was not taken up. I've repeatedly being told my edits are POV when this is in fact incorrect. My edits restored the standard wikipedia colour templates. You added arbitrarily decorative colour schemes in breach of WP:NAV but I'm the one whose edits are wrong. I've been told I don't "recognise basic colours when placed side by side comparatively", but you of course know all about colour schemes, this apparently being a prime example. Again, you've repeatedly refused to answer the question about changing the standard (and widely used) template colour schemes.

I am finding it wearying to log in to wikipedia every day to see the orange banner, which means I have another sarky message from Candlewicke. If you have anything further to say, please reply on your own talk page and not here. Thank you. Snappy (talk) 00:22, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Eurocoin.mc.series1.100.gif)

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.mc.series1.100.gif. 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) 05:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)