User talk:N-HH

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Nickhh)
Jump to: navigation, search


I noticed you had cleared your talk page, and I wanted to say, since it appears you might be leaving, take some time off away from this place and if you feel like coming back, fantastic. I have noticed your editing throughout different aspects of Wikipedia and you do good work, so it would be terribly wrong for Wikipedia to lose an editor of your quality. Just thought I would give my 2 cents. Take care. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:15, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Cheers. I do try, but as I've been aware for a long time, the effort-to-achievement ratio involved in trying to make even the most minor and commonsense improvement or adjustment here is often so lopsided that I really not sure I can be bothered anymore. It's of no benefit to me and limited benefit to overall actual page content, even when you do get some changes to stick, especially given that I don't generally do much more than minor copyediting/expansion and crap-content deletion anyway. Those who are convinced that pages have to reflect how they see the world rather than how the world sees the topic in question, and are determined to battle on with that regardless of the evidence and of WP rules, are always going to win out regardless, especially when forums such as ANI and ArbCom – which I've always tried to avoid anyway – as often as not end up effectively validating such behaviour, even when you've spent a lot of time doing all you can to present the actual nature of the problem at hand. I have to know how to research and write and to present information objectively in my professional life – why volunteer time here for nothing trying to do that simply to end up in futile conflict with the 50% of contributors who don't know how to do those things? Good luck with keeping an eye on the occasional additions of our mutual friend. N-HH talk/edits 08:41, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. If you are still around, your comments are humbly requested at WP:AN/I#POV editors on Anarcho-capitalismMisterDub (talk | contribs) 14:11, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

As above, I'm done here I'm afraid (and should have given up a long time ago really). I would briefly add something at ANI but once you start again it's too easy to get sucked into more pointless back and forth with people who are either too thick to understand anything or simply have an agenda that they're not going to resile from. Also, there's the point, referred to above and pretty much proven again by the thread you've opened, that ANI and related processes just do not work for anything other than the most egregious problems. Admins usually just make a cursory review and unless they can see an obvious breach of rules will just mark them down as a "content dispute" – perhaps not unreasonably, since they're just contributors like everyone else who happen to have extra housekeeping functions; they don't run the site as such of course, but nevertheless. Even if they get involved, they'll absurdly suggest that both "sides" are as responsible as each other, thinking this means they're being even-handed. It sometimes takes a little more investigation to see through and actually deal with the behaviour of people who persistently push an agenda, or who display their own ignorance of the real-world mainstream or of what an encyclopedia is meant to be, but know how to stay just inside the rulebook here as technically and superficially applied. Good luck though .. N-HH talk/edits 09:43, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Straw Poll[edit]

There is a straw poll that may interest you regarding the proper use of "Religion =" in infoboxes of atheists.

The straw poll is at Template talk:Infobox person#Straw poll.

--Guy Macon (talk) 09:28, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Topic ban for Martin Hogbin[edit]

N-HH, there is now a move at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed_topic_ban_of_Martin_Hogbin. You do not need to become heavily involved but could you just point out that I am not a lone crazy editor but one of a group who disgree with the current content and that I have now proposed a compromise solution. Martin Hogbin (talk) 23:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your support at the proposed topic ban. As Arbcom have not understood the question I have, like you seem to have done, lost all faith in WP and I will be greatly reducing my editing. It was an interesting social experiment. Martin Hogbin (talk) 18:12, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Relax duplicate linking rule (again!)[edit]

Hi there! I see you're suffering from some Wiki-burnout, but you might still be interested to see that I'm reopening the issue of duplicate links at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Linking#Relax_duplicate_linking_rule. --Slashme (talk) 21:34, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Infobox England region[edit]

Just to let you know, Template:Infobox England region has been nominated for deletion again here. Regards, Rob984 (talk) 20:13, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Oriya_language#Requested_move_17_June_2015. Thanks. Cpt.a.haddock (talk) 21:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)


Hallo N-HH, if you have time and lust, you can join the discussion at Talk:Benito_Mussolini#Founder_of_Fascism.3F. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 11:54, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

As you were involved in the earlier AfD[edit]

Sending this to all active editors who were involved in that AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siege of Kapisa (2nd nomination). Doug Weller (talk) 11:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Jeremy Corbyn[edit]

Hi N-HH: with ref to Corbyn - I saw your intervention following my (corr. Chair - official title (& Proper noun, when phrased in full, ie. Chair of the Stop the War Coalition. Not a chair to sit on... (also NATO) etc...)) - preference for the title Chair I understand, but as to why it should be spelled as chair perhaps you could elucidate? Many thanks. M Mabelina (talk) 08:50, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Right, first you have restored your entire edit, and returned clearly inappropriate/POV language re NATO and Lithuania and other style changes (such as "well-known" to "well known" when preceding a noun, pointlessly adding "HE" to the Lithuanian ambassador's name, refactoring stylings from a printed source etc). Suggesting that this is just about one minor capitalisation is mendacious and misleading. As for that capitalisation, prevalent real-world practice these days is to not capitalise job titles or posts, and WP follows that (see the relevant section of the MOS). Arguably, "chair of the Stop the War Coalition" could come under the full-title exemption, but to me it seems a job description, not a formal title for a high office of state, hence it would not.
More broadly, you seem to have a problem with understanding style issues, excessive linking, and deploying slanted language and phrasing on pages. Various guidelines and policies are there to help you with all those. Finally, if you're going to come to another user's talk page, please place new threads in a new section at the bottom of the page. N-HH talk/edits 10:00, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
your attitude is pretty disgraceful, particularly since you leave comments above without satisfactory reply and resort to foul language and abuse in what seems to be a bullying attempt to get your way. Perhaps you could attend to the points in question - I should much like to hear your answer. It beats me as to why you should be so hostile unless it is to divert attention (& cause conflict in so doing)?? M Mabelina (talk) 14:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
I answered your question within an hour, explicitly and in some detail, addressing not only the point about capitalising chair, but the other changes you made. You then kept reposting your question over and over, while complaining I hadn't responded. You're still telling me I haven't responded, even though this time you've actually posted (just about) in the right place, directly under that very response. If you don't understand why that behaviour might aggravate someone, you are a bigger idiot than you've already come across as. You also appear to not have a clue about common capitalisation standards. Now, do not post on my talk page again, even in the right place and even if you have something new to say. I am no longer interested and will delete it without even reading it. If you persist, I will, reluctantly, go to ANI. Thank you. N-HH talk/edits 15:06, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
A friendly heads-up -- you've now reverted twice in <24 hours. I agree with your edit, but even so I'd suggest you self-revert. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 10:10, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
My reading of the note at the top of the page says the limit only applies to file/image-related edits (due to the debate over the photo). Even if it doesn't, thanks for the warning, but I'm not fussed tbh. This user makes lots of useless and confused edits, and reverting them when spotted is sensible even when it is against the rules. N-HH talk/edits 10:13, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
I certainly agree re the edits. As for the restriction, it started out as applying to the image only, but it was then broadened... Nomoskedasticity (talk) 10:24, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Ah, OK, the note at the top of the talk page is broader than the one that pops up when you edit, which isn't very helpful. I'll stick with what it says when you actually edit. If an admin changes that, I'll revert. N-HH talk/edits 10:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Elizabeth II[edit]

If it were up to me, I'd have the opening sentence read as "Queen of the United Kingdom and the 15 other Commonwealth realms" or "Queen of the United Kingdom and 15 other independent countries". It would've satisfied WP:WEIGHT & read much better. I'd explain further, but then I'd be risking breaching WP:AGF, concerning the motives of others. GoodDay (talk) 12:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

PS: You just had to stir things up again, eh. ;) GoodDay (talk) 15:58, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppetry[edit]

I say, do you think that there is some bizarre, yet subtle sockpuppetry going on over there, right at the bottom [1]?! Anyway, thank you! Ta-ra! -- Urquhartnite (talk) 19:36, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


Information icon This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue (Mabelina (talk · contribs)) with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- MIESIANIACAL 00:07, 28 January 2016 (UTC)