User talk:Richie wright1980
- 1 Welcome!
- 2 Canal Street
- 3 Help
- 4 AfD nomination of Stanley Street, Liverpool
- 5 Stanley Street, Liverpool
- 6 Image
- 7 Further comment
- 8 LGBT WikiProject Newsletter (July 2008)
- 9 WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter
- 10 WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)
- 11 BLP
- 12 August 2011
- 13 Liverpool
- 14 Please sign with four tildes
- 15 Invitation to wikiFeed
- 16 unifying introduction of all EU states
- 17 Wiki Loves Pride 2014
- 18 Wiki Loves Pride!
- 19 ArbCom elections are now open!
- 20 Wiki Loves Pride 2016
- 21 Liverpool population
- 22 Liverpool
- 23 ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
- 24 We're on Twitter!
- 25 ArbCom 2017 election voter message
I think you are right. If any of the bars are notable in their own right, they should have their own article, otherwise it's just a link to a commercial business or its website, and that looks like advertising to me. Wikipedia isn't intended to be a directory of gay bars (or anything for that matter) jimfbleak (talk) 18:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- I've cleared the text now, Stanley Street, Liverpool works OK, perhaps the search is running behind. Images are formatted [[image:name.jpg|thumb|description]], in the article. Use the "upload file" tab, make sure it's your own picture, not taken from the web, and chose the GFDL licence. jimfbleak (talk) 19:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- Not sure why you can't upload image, I thought the only requirement was to be logged in. You may be able to do via Commons. On your Preferences page, check user profile and click manage your global account. Failing that, follow this link and log in manually. I see the article is at AFD, but it looks likely that it will be merged rather than deleted. It may be that you need more good text to justify a separate article. jimfbleak (talk) 05:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
- I only put 1 tag on it, someone else put the others. It really originally sounded too much like an ad. Michellecrisp (talk) 23:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- I know you weren't asking me to remove my warnings, but I reviewed my edits, and noticed you weren't vandalizing. It was pretty stupid of me to think you were vandalizing the article:-P I clearly didn't pay close attention to your edits, and I just saw the word "gay" so I thought you were vandalizing. Calling someone or something "gay" is a common form of vandalism. Since you didn't actually vandalize my warnings weren't needed, so I took them off your talk page. Sorry about that.
- As for the images, I don't know for sure why that's happening. Try asking at the help desk and someone with more knowledge on the subject will assist you. Sorry for not being able to help you:-( I hope you decide to continue editing. Wikipedia always needs more people to help out;-) Have a nice day!--SJP Chat 23:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- Stanley St may be a candidate for WP:MERGE if not deleted. you may want to look at what Wikipedia is not. Michellecrisp (talk) 02:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Stanley Street, Liverpool
An article that you have been involved in editing, Stanley Street, Liverpool, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanley Street, Liverpool. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Stanley St and the Gay Quarter are both notable for exactly the same reason. Michellecrisp (talk) 00:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I got a messgage from yourself saying that my article Stanley Street, Liverpool should not be deleted, but there is a deletion notice on it. Could you please help me, and remove the deletion notice from my article? (Richie wright1980 (talk) 01:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC))
- I did not argue that the article (and BTW, please see WP:OWN) should not be deleted, but that it did not qualify for speedy deletion. There is now a discussion about deleting it, linked from the template on the article page. Please make your voice heard in that discussion. You may also find Wikipedia:Help, my article got nominated for deletion! helpful. --Tkynerd (talk) 04:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
You didn't chose a licence and the image will be deleted. You need to select "own work, multi-licence cc-by-sa-3.0 and GFDL" from the licence box, or it will be treated as unlicensed. Add the licence, or if you can't do that, re-upload and make sure you chose a licence. jimfbleak (talk) 06:29, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate that you are new to Wikipedia and looking to contribute. May I suggest visiting and editing several different articles to get a feel for Wikipedia policy. It would help you know the processes in building up articles to good article standard. Certainly I believe all your edits are in good faith. Michellecrisp (talk) 08:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
LGBT WikiProject Newsletter (July 2008)
|The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter|
- Newsletter delivery by xenobot 13:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter
|The Miss Julie Memorial LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter|
WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)
|The Miss Julie Memorial LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter:
Special Pride 2009 Booty call edition
- Newsletter delivery by xenobot 17:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to add sources to the Liverpool article. Until then they're unsourced and will be removed per WP:BLP. Note that WP:3RR doesn't apply to content removed under this policy. – Lionel (talk) 08:01, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on user talk:Lionelt. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Don't accuse editors of "destroying wikipedia", this is tantamount to making frivolous accusations of vandalism. – Lionel (talk) 01:12, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
It's nothing personal and I never realised it was a matter of "fair"? Liverpool (both the city and the borough) has 1 population. The Liverpool Urban Area is not Liverpool. The Liverpool City region is not Liverpool, nor is Merseyside. The Leeds and Manchester articles are both also a mess of population sizes and descriptions. I have no idea why there is an obsession to introduce that amount of conflicting dimensions and population information in the lede rather than in the relevant sub-sections (be it Demography, Economy etc) or wiki pages particularly for things like the Liverpool City Region, which is a Local Authority association and not an actual area.
Please sign with four tildes
A problem with your time stamps was reported at Wikipedia:Help desk#Help, I've buggered up an article! You are apparently adding the time manually and not using the real UTC time. You are an hour off, maybe because you have summer time and UTC does not. Don't add the time manually. Please sign with four
~~~~. This automatically adds the UTC time. See more at Wikipedia:Signatures. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:49, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Invitation to wikiFeed
Hello Richie wright1980,
I'm part of a team that is researching ways to help Wikipedia editors find interesting content to contribute to Wikipedia. More specifically, we are investigating whether content from news sources can be used to enhance Wikipedia editing. We have created a tool, called wikiFeed, that allows you to specify Twitter and/or RSS feeds from news sources that are interesting to you. wikiFeed then helps you make connections between those feeds and Wikipedia articles. We believe that using this tool may be a lot of fun, and may help you come up with some ideas on how to contribute to Wikipedia in ways that interest you. Please participate! To do so, complete this survey and follow this link to our website. Once you're there, click the "create an account" link to get started.
For more information about wikiFeed, visit our project page. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask via my talk page, or by email at email@example.com. We appreciate your time and hope you enjoy playing with wikiFeed!
unifying introduction of all EU states
Seriously, I strongly advise you to revert all the changes you have made to all the countries you have edited. They are all still independent countries, and yet you have removed that information to say that they are just states that are part of the EU. Such radical changes need some discussion, and I imagine you may get some drama directed at yourself because of the number and nature of these edits. (talk) 09:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- I have reverted all these edits, since they clearly have no consensus, and I agree that they are misleading. Please start a discussion (I would suggest at Talk:European Union or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Europe) before reinstating. - filelakeshoe 09:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Thankyou for your comments, I will start a discussion as per your suggestion, however, I feel what is actually misleading is stating that countries are sovereign when under the Lisbon Treaty, most of the sovereignty belonging to the nation states has been surrendered to the EU. The concept of fully independent sovereign states when it comes to the EU is, therefore, misleading, most of the laws are made in Brussels, and this fact of life should be reflected in the introductory paragraphs, this is not misleading it's the truth.Richie wright1980 (talk) 10:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- All too often, when one claims something is "the truth" what it often means is that you happen to agree with that particular interpretation. Since we are talking about some political issues, it is all the more often a case of "one perceives the truth to be which interpretation one just wants to accept, for whatever reason". That is enough to alert one to a possible failure of neutral point of view, and so would also alert one to a need to discuss the issues with others. (talk) 10:34, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- The description at Germany - a federal European Union state - was particularly poorly worded. RashersTierney (talk) 10:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes RashersTierney, I agree with your point. Would members here like to refer to the discussion I have started at Talk:European Union and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Europe Richie wright1980 (talk) 11:04, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Btw, new sections on talk pages should usually be started at the bottom; plus it's not that helpful to open two identical threads on different pages inviting discussion. Open one, and then post a link to that on any other pages where you want to attract people's attention. N-HH talk/edits 11:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Pride 2014
Hi Richie. In case you are not aware, there is an upcoming campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related topics on Wikipedia, culminating with an international edit-a-thon on June 21. See Wiki Loves Pride 2014 for more information. If you are interested, you might consider creating a page for a major city (or cities!) near you, with a list of LGBT-related articles that need to be created or improved. This would be a tremendous help to Wikipedia and coverage of LGBT culture and history. Thanks for your consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions! --Another Believer (Talk) 16:24, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!
- What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
- When? June 2015
- How can you help?
- 1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
- 2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
- 3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)
Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!
If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.
Thanks, and happy editing!
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) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Pride 2016
As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?
- Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
- Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
- Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)
Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.
This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.
Hi. I restored your addition of the 2015 population estimate to Liverpool, and removed the Liverpool/Birkenhead metropolitan area figure, which doesn't seem to be for 2014 anyway. The infobox figure comes from Template:English district population automatically, but that template still contains the 2014 data. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Instead of idly threatening, please report me. My edits and contributions to both Liverpool and wider region are self evidently constructive. Nothing I say in my edits can possibly be construed as being negative about the city as it basically says the same thing without conflating various regions, urban areas and districts. It is also based entirely on several other Featured Articles, which after how many years Liverpool's main article has still no achieved. Koncorde (talk) 22:18, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- I suggest you monitor the Liverpool talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Liverpool and I will keep an eye on your activites as regards the Liverpool intro. You are clearly not making constructive edits in this area and your agenda is obvious. To undermine Liverpool, to undermine that is the largest city in the local area and that its county and city region form part of a larger metropolitan area. It is wrong for you to undermine these facts and to separate the obvious large city with its surrounding areas. You are politically not academically driven. Richie wright1980 (talk) 22:37, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- Report me already, please do it. If you can substantiate your claims then I am sure some admin somewhere would agree with you. I have no idea how saying Liverpool is the largest city in the metropolitan region of liverpool/Birkenhead (which is what it said) diminishes Liverpool, at no stage in my edits has anything been removed, please go back 2 months and look at the original structure.
- As it currently stands you are serving as an SPA making uncivil claims and threats to get your own way. Koncorde (talk) 23:12, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Liverpool, in North West England, is a major city and metropolitan borough with an estimated population of 478,580 in 2015. The local authority is Liverpool City Council which is the most populous local government district within the metropolitan county of Merseyside and the largest within the Liverpool City Region. Liverpool, along with its metropolitan county and city region forms part of a significantly larger urban area known as the Liverpool/Birkenhead metropolitan area which had an estimated population of over 2.24 million in 2011.
Before you make any further edits, explain POINT BY POINT what is factually wrong with the above intro??? Forget mere semantics I'm asking you specifically what is factually wrong with it?
- Nice, now you want to talk. If we are ignoring 'semantics' (i.e. the literal meaning of what is written) then what is factually wrong about the other version or any other words in the English dictionary?
- Liverpool, in North West England, is a major city and metropolitan borough with an estimated population of 478,580 in 2015. nothing wrong, also nothing wrong with the existing reference to Merseyside. Most other articles refer to the county within the immediate introduction. There are some that don't.
- The local authority is Liverpool City Council which is the most populous local government district within the metropolitan county of Merseyside and the largest within the Liverpool City Region. Generally speaking the local authority is not something mentioned in the immediate introduction of any articles, it's not something particularly notable to summarise a city. It's notability, if it has one, is as part of the combined authority which is how I summarised it (rather than trying to use it as a dimension of population which is equivalent to both the City / Borough).
- Liverpool, along with its metropolitan county and city region forms part of a significantly larger urban area known as the Liverpool/Birkenhead metropolitan area which had an estimated population of over 2.24 million in 2011. The city region is within Merseyside, as is Liverpool. The use of 'and' between county and city region suggests one is contiguous to the other (or that they do not conform to similar dimensions). The wording also suggests an ownership of both the county and city region by Liverpool, rather than being a constituent part of. Koncorde (talk) 23:59, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- I hope you can see why, with Correctus most recent edits, death by a thousand edits is undertaken. "Liverpool, along with its metropolitan county and city region, forms the fifth largest metropolitan area in the UK, with an estimated population of over 2.24 million in 2011." now Birkenhead, Chester and all the area outside of Merseyside / City Region has been excluded from the 2.24 million. This is the kind of thing that I was opposing last year, and why I structured the intro as I did. Koncorde (talk) 11:42, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Thankyou. I took a cue from the Manchester article and amended the sentence to "Liverpool, along with its metropolitan county and city region, lies within the fifth largest metropolitan area in the UK". The sentence is now correct. I don't see it necessary to further define the metro area in the lede as it is already defined when you click the hyperlink to List of metropolitan areas in the United Kingdom Richie wright1980 (talk) 11:23, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
- It only ever got defined because others insisted on calling it "Liverpool" alone. Koncorde (talk) 20:53, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Actually, "Liverpool and its surrounding areas" reads an awful lot better don't you think? You don't have to worry about Liverpool dominating the area, it saves repetition on the county and city region and it's technically correct. Dont see a problem with the latest edit myself? Richie wright1980 (talk) 23:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
- I have no worry about Liverpool dominating the area, which is why my version read "The city is the largest settlement in the Liverpool/Birkenhead metropolitan area which had an estimated population of over 2.24 million in 2011." compared to Correctus "Liverpool and its surrounding areas form the fifth largest metropolitan area in the UK, with an estimated population of over 2.24 million in 2011." vs "Liverpool, along with its metropolitan county and city region forms part of a significantly larger urban area known as the Liverpool/Birkenhead metropolitan area which had an estimated population of over 2.24 million in 2011". I'm at a loss to explain that logic because when I said "The new lede then immediately repeats the phrases relating to county and city region in the next sentence" I was attacked for political motivation, but now it's "better". Slowly but surely the sense will be winkled out of the intro as it was previously. Koncorde (talk) 00:27, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I think both myself and Correctus agree on the level that Liverpool and its surrounding metropolitan areas should be contigous with eachother in the same sentence. However you seem intent not to follow this pattern.
Your version reads:- "The city is the largest settlement in the Liverpool/Birkenhead metropolitan area”
It is an absolute given that any metro area has a densely populated urban core surrounded by suburbs and multiple satellite townships. That is the nature of metropolitan areas. In the case of the Liverpool/Birkenhead metropolitan area the densely populated urban core is most obviously Liverpool. Therefore, there is no need to state that Liverpool is the largest settlement in the metropolitan area, it should blindingly obvious as is the case with every single other city!!
I honestly don't know what you are trying to achieve other than to detach Liverpool with its natural metropolitan area. You do seem overly concerned with all of this?? Can we just leave it there please? Richie wright1980 (talk) 01:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Discussions like the one above should take place on the article talk page, not pages like this. Anyway, I've made further changes to the wording, essentially to remove the overemphasis on cultural and language elements from the lead, moving them to a new section of text - and also to merge some of the short paragraphs. These can be discussed further on the article talk page, as necessary. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:22, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
We're on Twitter!
|WikiLGBT is on Twitter!
RachelWex 17:43, 10 June 2017 (UTC)