User:Kookiethebird

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

21st April 2015[edit]

Bleeding heck! I've been mentioned, albeit anonymously, in the Guardian! (And, of course, my username is just something random I thought up one evening.)

"Grant Shapps accused of editing Wikipedia pages of Tory rivals"

To think that I had trusted Contribsx to be neutral in editing Shapps's article to try and make it balanced. Well, well, well.

Shapps reminds me a bit of Chris Huhne, who denied and denied doing anything wrong until suddenly one day he admitted he was guilty. People had to keep investigating and investigating him (and also stop him having the case thrown out), until eventually he couldn't get out of it. He then tried to downplay it. This is what is happening with Shapps. He keeps denying doing anything wrong and people have to keep investigating him, and then when he can't get out of something any more he doesn't actually admit that he's done anything wrong but just tries to downplay it instead.

Imagine the immense stress he would have caused to the constituent who he threatened with legal action based on a lie.

While I'm writing this, I just wanted to mention that what sometimes motivates me is to do what I can against unethical behaviour. And I'm a big fan of Private Eye, with its focus on exposing unethical behaviour, but without becoming too po-faced about it. Kookiethebird (talk) 21:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC)


Oh yeah, and I particularly liked this bit in the Guardian article:

When the Guardian first approached Shapps saying that Wikipedia would be closing down this user account because Wikipedia said it was linked to him, a spokesman for the Conservative party said: “This story is completely false and defamatory. It is nonsense from start to finish.”

When Shapps was sent a detailed exposition of the changes made by Contribsx – including posts critical of cabinet colleagues such as George Osborne – the Tory chairman did not respond.

He lies and lies and lies. Kookiethebird (talk) 22:02, 21 April 2015 (UTC)


Oops, I missed the following paragraph to the two I copied above, where he denies this and says it is defamatory. The problem here is that after having been categorically exposed as a liar previously, when he strongly denies something now it just comes across as if he is "over-firmly denying" it (in other words, lying once again). As for supposedly being defamatory, that's what he said about what the constituent said who he threatened with legal action – which, of course, was based on a lie. So he really doesn't have a whole lot of credibility here. Kookiethebird (talk) 22:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Other stuff[edit]

I couldn't resist any more. It's time to have my own page with user boxes.

Nelumno nucifera open flower - botanic garden adelaide2.jpg This user's editing philosophy...
Contribute, let go
The Belousov-Zhabotinsky Reaction.gif Go slowly insane as you sit and stare...
Blinky.svg This user wants to save the whales.
This user knows that because English is a living language, grammar and syntax are not fixed.

Ok, the Break tag doesn't work that well with user boxes.

FTFY :P Rob (talk | contribs) 23:32, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
. The This user does not put two spaces after a full stop.

"…"? This user thinks "British punctuation is best for quotation marks". Do you?

UK This user uses British English.

Tables[edit]

I'm a big fan of tables as I feel that numbers can be much more useful than words in understanding how an organisation is doing. For example, a police force might be described as "good", or it might be broken down into parts with descriptions of "excellent", "good", "fair" or "poor", but that doesn't tell me much, whereas detection rates tells me a lot more.

These are some of the tables that I've created.

Road casualties in London[edit]

The following table shows the number of casualties, grouped by severity, on the roads of Greater London (including the City of London), over the past four years.

2008 2009 2010 2011
Fatal 204 184 126 159
Serious 3,322 3,043 2,760 2,646
Slight 24,627 24,752 26,003 26,452
Total 28,361 27,979 28,889 29,257

Road casualties in Surrey[edit]

The following table shows the number of casualties, grouped by severity, on Surrey's roads over the past three years.

2008 2009 2010
Fatal 45 41 32
Serious 483 530 488
Slight 5,411 5,184 4,811
Total 5,939 5,755 5,331

Road casualties in Sussex[edit]

The following table shows the combined total figures for the number of casualties on the roads of East and West Sussex for the most recent three years for which data is available.

2008 2009 2010
Fatal 73 61 48
Serious 810 763 644
Slight 4,159 3,974 3,487
Total 5,042 4,798 4,179

Detection rates[edit]

The following table shows the percentage detection rates for the Metropolitan Police by offence group for 2010/11.

Total Violence against the person Sexual offences Robbery Burglary Offences against vehicles Other theft offences Fraud and forgery Criminal damage Drug offences Other offences
Metropolitan Police 24 35 23 17 11 5 14 16 13 91 63
England and Wales 28 44 30 21 13 11 22 24 14 94 69
Detection rates by offence group, percentages
Total Violence against the person Sexual offences Robbery Burglary Offences against vehicles Other theft offences Fraud and forgery Criminal damage Drug offences Other offences
Surrey 20 28 26 25 10 6 17 22 9 91 48
England and Wales 28 44 30 21 13 11 22 24 14 94 69

General Election 2010 results[edit]

The following table shows the results for all Surrey constituencies in the General Election in 2010. The results are given as percentages.

Con Lib Dem Lab UKIP Others
East Surrey 56.7 25.9 9.0 6.9 1.5
Epsom and Ewell 56.2 26.8 11.9 4.6 0.5
Esher and Walton 58.9 24.8 10.7 3.3 2.3
Guildford 53.3 39.3 5.1 1.8 0.5
Mole Valley 57.5 28.7 7.0 5.1 1.6
Reigate 53.4 26.2 11.3 4.2 5.4
Runnymede and Weybridge 55.9 21.6 13.4 6.5 2.5
South West Surrey 58.7 30.2 6.0 2.6 2.6
Spelthorne 47.1 25.9 16.5 8.5 2.2
Surrey Heath 57.6 25.8 10.2 6.3 --
Woking 50.3 37.4 8.0 3.8 0.5
Average 55.1 28.4 9.9 4.9 1.8

Current and past rates [for minimum wage][edit]

This table shows the current and past rates and is correct as of October 2012.

From Adult Rate Development Rate 16-17 Year Olds Rate Apprentice Rate
1 Oct 2012 £6.19 £4.98 £3.68 £2.65
1 Oct 2011 £6.08 £4.98 £3.68 £2.60
1 Oct 2010 £5.93 £4.92 £3.64 £2.50
1 Oct 2009 £5.80 £4.83 £3.57
1 Oct 2008 £5.73 £4.70 £3.53
1 Oct 2007 £5.52 £4.60 £3.53
1 Oct 2006 £5.35 £4.45 £3.40
1 Oct 2005 £5.05 £4.25 £3.30
1 Oct 2004 £4.85 £4.10 £3.00
1 Oct 2003 £4.50 £3.80 £3.00
1 Oct 2002 £4.20 £3.50
1 Oct 2001 £4.10 £3.50
1 Oct 2000 £3.70 £3.20
1 Apr 1999 £3.60 £3.00


Surrey Police[edit]

Surrey Police employee numbers:
2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12
Police Officers 1,959 1,967 1,963 1,944 1,872 1,890 1,885 1,974
Special Constables 289 280 275 278 314 327 337 345
PCSOs 115 126 203 211 206 224 229 228
Police Staff 1,472 1,541 1,680 1,808 1,732 1,829 1,805 1,715
Designated Officers 39 76 104 179 338 263 287 306


References how-to[edit]

The following is a reminder to myself about how to do references:

<ref>BBC (24 April 2013). [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22278947 Milly Dowler police 'amnesia' over phone hack claims].</ref>