This is an archive of past discussions about User:Richerman. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
rare astronomical event
Thank you for building bridges to the transit of Venus as a rare event, looking at the broader perspective of other occurrences in history, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fishing weir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Algonkin. 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.
Quite agree it would need a source. But it seems Cooder himself makes this claim: ".. he claims to have provided the main riff for the Stones' "Honky Tonk Women" [1]? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:36, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
That's fine but as you know we can't put in claims like that without a source. I've heard the story before but with a quick search before I went out I found an account of how they got the tuning from him but not of him claiming to have provided the riff see here. In that case it was best to revert until I had time to find something more concrete we could use. Actually, the bio you quote was the next item on the search but I hadn't got as far as reading that one. Richerman(talk)17:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Haha. Yes, quite. I'm sure just a tuning would be nearer the truth... stories tend to get embellished, don't they. I'm not sure I'd believe it until I saw Cooder himself speaking those exact words in a filmed interview. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:26, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
No need to apologise, it doesn't bother me in the least. It rather reminds me of the Queen of Hearts shouting "off with their heads" at all and sundry. If someone insists on making themselves look ridiculous there is not much you can do about it. Richerman(talk)21:52, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
You've probably got a flavour of the tenor at that ArbCom case by now, which is that anything you say, and anything you may have said in the past will be distorted beyond recognition and used in evidence against you. That's one of the reasons I haven't taken part in it; the other reason of course is that I've got no idea what it's supposed to be about. EricCorbett19:20, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
I watched for a long time saying nothing but eventually my typing fingers got the better of me - in real life it's my mouth and it happens a lot quicker:-) Still, valuable lesson learned - as Gerda says, silence is best. And no, I'm not sure what it's about either but it certainly isn't about the mythical Manchester Mafia. Richerman(talk)20:01, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Ah yes, I know that scenario. I was watching something by David Attenborough last night, saw some fascinating behaviour with hermit crabs lining up in order of size to swap shells. I went to our article which had nothing about it, so I found some scientific papers online and added it to the article. The papers told me it was called a vacancy chain, which was a sociology article. I linked to it and then added a new section "In other species" to that article So that's two articles improved from one short clip on TV. You never know where editing is going to lead you next. I'm glad you get QI down under - not a bad swap for Neighbours is it? :-) Richerman(talk)14:55, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
BNA access
Hello, Richerman. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Badbea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berriedale. 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.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Feoffee, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Colyton. 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.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Manchester Racecourse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pendleton. 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.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Manchester Racecourse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Fitzgerald. 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.
Yes, I'd noticed that, best of luck with the nomination - I hope to see it there on the day. I'll pop over there and give it some support. Richerman(talk)10:51, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Next meetups in North England
Hello. Would you be interested in attending one of the next wikimeets in the north of England? They will take place in:
If you can make them, please sign up on the relevant wikimeet page!
If you want to receive future notifications about these wikimeets, then please add your name to the notification list (or remove it if you're already on the list and you don't want to receive future notifications!)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Heath, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Woodbury Common. 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.
Hope I haven't stepped on your toes but I decided to scythe through the whole lot. The Friends have their mention but I find the whole lot about redevelopment, well awful. J3Mrs (talk) 14:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Not at all. I realised after writing the reply on the talk page that the text had been put back in unchanged and so I did a quick pruning job before I went out. I was aware that more needed to go but I wanted to read through the sources to see what was verifiable before going any further. Richerman(talk)16:21, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
I think that Florence was classified by the Feminism Project as being of low importance because she wasn't American. EricCorbett20:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
As Florence Nagle was originally not given an importance rating I looked for their criteria and couldn't find any. I then asked what they were on their talk page eight days ago and no-one replied. Looking at this I thought she must more important to the project than Yoko fucking Ono and certainly shouldn't be in with Beyonce and her ilk. However, I decided to go for the mid point and see what happened. I'll ask MontanaBW what it's all about but perhaps it's not a conversation you should get involved with as you'll end up getting blocked again - or maybe that's just a red rag to a bull:-) Richerman(talk)23:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Help us improve wikimeets by filling in the UK Wikimeet survey!
Hello! I'm running a survey to identify the best way to notify Wikimedians about upcoming UK wikimeets (informal, in-person social meetings of Wikimedians), and to see if we can improve UK wikimeets to make them accessible and attractive to more editors and readers. All questions are optional, and it will take about 10 minutes to complete. Please fill it in at:
Hi Richerman,
Due to the time difference between North America and where I am, I missed the entire latter part of the conversation on my IP about gender bias on the main page; I woke up to some interesting reading this morning! Just wanted to acknowledge your role in stepping in and attempting to restore order. Also thanks for linking me up to the GGTF, looks interesting. Cheers MurielMary (talk) 07:05, 31 October 2015 (UTC)MurielMary
You're welcome. I just wanted you to know that we are aware there is a problem and that there are attempts to do something about it. There are, however, big arguments about the extent of the problem on Wikipedia and how to fix it - for instance, how can you tell how many female editors there are when most people use a gender neutral user name? However, that doesn't mean the issue should be trivialised with dismissive jokes. Actually, I'm not American either - I'm British :-) Richerman(talk)10:38, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are a party or offered a preliminary statement and/or evidence in the Arbitration enforcement 2 case. This is a one-time message.
1.1) The Arbitration Committee confirms the sanctions imposed on Eric Corbett as a result of the Interactions at GGTF case, but mandates that all enforcement requests relating to them be filed at arbitration enforcement and be kept open for at least 24 hours.
3) For his breaches of the standards of conduct expected of editors and administrators, Black Kite is admonished.
6) The community is reminded that discretionary sanctions have been authorised for any page relating to or any edit about: (i) the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) any process or discussion relating to these topics, all broadly construed.
Feminism is a third party ideology that has nothing to do with the suffragettes. If you insist on targeting me, I'll simply become harder to track and edit as an unblockable entity.
I'm not targeting you, I'm trying to prevent you from being blocked by pointing out what will happen if you continue edit warring. Wikipedia is built on consensus - go to the talk page and discuss. Richerman(talk)18:19, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
Four years ago ...
rare astronomical event
... you were recipient no. 144 of Precious, a prize of QAI!
File permission problem with File:Foam on the Irwell.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Foam on the Irwell.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kellyhi!16:39, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
File:Cathedral Landing Stage.jpg listed for discussion
Your photo, but in the interest of thoroughness it would be appreciated if you know, if you could document who made the stained glass window shown. I appreciate for some really old windows this may be next to impossible, but it helps those wanting to reuse the image concerned. I will also note that this image appears slightly out of focus, something you may wish to consider if you were wanting to do a new version. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:16, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
The one on the right has full details. I'm not sure why I uploaded the detail file, but as it isn't used anywhere it can be deleted. Richerman(talk)10:39, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Richerman. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Sorry, I restored Moors murders back to the version by Cassianto as it seemed easiest; for some reason - maybe a glitch in the software? - your reverts introduced some characters above the lead and MOSLINK in the info box. I'd taken the article off my watch list a while ago but it seems to have crept back on again. :-( SagaciousPhil - Chat09:47, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi, re this edit: the sentence "Often described as the Grand British Experimental Railway the success or failure of which would decide plans for all future railways." is where more verbs would help. If the claim needs a reference, why did you not either tag it {{citation needed}} or simply remove it? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:49, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Richerman. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Hello, Richerman. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Thanks Gerda, it's very good of you to keep track of these things. Is it really seven years? - that makes me feel old :-) Richerman(talk)15:49, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
File source problem with File:Manchester Zoological Gardens.jpeg
Thank you for uploading File:Manchester Zoological Gardens.jpeg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Hi there! Hope you are well. Just to let you know, there is currently a vote taking place on the talk:List of terrorist incidents in London page, over a debate as to whether certain extreme Suffragette actions can be classed as acts of terror and, therefore, be included on said list. Having seen that you have previously added some really useful contributions on such Suffragette activities at pages relevant to Suffragette actions, such as on the Suffragette page, I thought that this might be a debate that would interest you. Currently, there is a compromise proposal being put forward that the most notable actions would be included but with a disclaimer that not everybody agrees on the description of these acts as 'terrorism'. If this is an issue that interests you, your input and contributions in the discussion would be greatly welcomed! You may want to cast a vote in the vote that's currently taking place. FAPeople'sCup (talk) 19:21, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Gulf Stream has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. PhotographyEdits (talk) 08:46, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Peter in Australia aka --Shirt58 (talk) 12:54, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
