User talk:SeoR

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

,

Malahide Castle and Fry Model Railway[edit]

Regarding the reversion of the cn tag.

  • Perhaps I was incorrect to remove it. However my time is limited and I wished to backout incorrect (disruptive) information that was added. One would kind of hope people who were interested would visit the Fry Model Railway article.
  • The tag you added had the incorrect citation needed date.
  • Citations were available in the Fry Model Railway at the start of the paragraph. If you felt this was needed then Template:Citation needed says: If you have the time and ability to find an authoritative reference, please do so. Then add the citation yourself, or correct the article text. After all, the ultimate goal is not to merely identify problems, but to fix them.. I would have kind of hoped someone wishing to add cn notice would have copped this.
  • I have a slight vested interest in this as you will see for my contributions to these articles.
  • An IP user has added a description and incorporated part of this while uploading citations. Some of his contributions have been removed as I have suggested they are more appropriate for the Fry Model Railway article. However I have not checked his contributions against the citations I have added so you may wish to recheck the article.
  • Regardless if you were caught out by this likely others also would have been, so the article is now probably in a better place.

Thanks. Djm-leighpark (talk) 00:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Djm-leighpark, thanks for taking the time to respond to the brief edit comments. And first, I especially agree with your final point, the article is improved by all this - it seems that between my error and your correction, we inspired someone with local knowledge too, and the balance is a better piece. I did make a mistake, and I'm glad that you picked it up promptly. As a semi-local, I am embarrassed by the error - I did hear about plans for a new location in Malahide, but it was so many years ago, I assumed they had failed, and that in the end the OPW had stepped in with the Marino Casino, some nice basement space or similar. I should have checked, and I'm glad that they're still going (though mystified how any plan can be so far off schedule, especially with 1.5 MEuro backing it). And this is where the citation comes in. As with myself, many users will not necessarily follow a link, and nor should they have to - statements in an article must be referenced there, if needed, and reliance on another article is not enough. I was doing an alphabetic review of articles, as I have small chunks of time for WP, and so I do not always have a chance to do secondary checking - the CN tag flags for someone with relevant knowledge. That said, when I do have time, I will sometimes, but usually where I have some prior knowledge, tackle the matter upfront. Anyway, thanks, and yes, all better in the end, and I will recheck as you suggest. SeoR (talk) 09:41, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

I visited the Fry model railway probably in the 1990s ... the only time I've been to Malahide. I was doing an article for the Drumm battery train when I sort of discovered the Fry Model Railway had sort of 'gone missing'. Well I did a stub article for the Fry Model Railway (including co-ordinates for the place!) and worked it back into the Malahide Castle article as that is where people would look for it. I used as 'As of' because the saga was ongoing ... but agree I should have also done a citation (but because I knew the rightful citation was in the Fry Model Railway and because there'd need to be a project update and probably more because I didn't know or think). Now for a straight cn citation I'd have probably done a Multley grumble about the citation notation police and fixed it ... but for pointing at the wrong Casino (That's actually the sort of foot in it mistake I make frequently) the appropriate course of action is to wlak the culprit round Howth Head or send him on the 33 bus for Loughshinny. Anyway I got stung by the conflict edit with the IP user when trying to fix it (who did everything but provide a citation!) so I had my come-uppance and missed even more of match of the day. I had removed some of this content as marginally beyond what was needed but felt it might have a place in the Fry Model Railway Article. I'm sometimes only here for the craic and buzzing the 5 pillars as close as I dare ... if a jobs not worth doing for a bottle of stout then its not worth doing. Now for the relevant stuff
  • I've improved (hopefully) the Fry Model Railway article
    • Added a section for Casino House wherein its details can be consolidated.
    • Including using a citation which included where the current Taoiseach announced back in 2012 that he was delighted this matter (the moved of the Fry Model Railway) was resolved and with the citation suggesting the Casino house was a romantic summerhouse.
    • Added a picture legitimately imported from Flickr to commons
    • Added a little more about the collection .. I'm a little stuffed for citable sources on the actual collection but this would improve when the Fry Model Railway approaches reopening ... this twitched my mind to Mail Packet Steamers ...
  • Essentially led me to create an article for TSS Princess Maud which was a relief on the Dun Laoghaire route and seems to have taken part in both the Dunkirk evacuation and D-Day landings.
  • Back to Malahide Castle ... the redlink and cn around the cricket annoyed me so I looked to quickly fix the 'cn' ...
    • Become concerned the 11500 claim was possibly incorrect and 10000 more appropriate
    • You can see my recent contributions for what happened when I checked another Cricket article citing that number ....
  • Proposal:' Cricket on Malahide Castle Article
    • Article to a section specifically called Cricket or Cricket ground
      • This will be a target anchor for an optional redirect article call sometime like Malahide Cricket Ground
    • If 11500 cannot be cited change the content to something like: ... actually Withdraw this prosposal as I've just noticed a Malahide Cricket Club Ground
      • I work across the various Malahide articles to ensure they link properly to this. I may soften the Malahide Cricket Clud ground size to a size over 10,000 and 'one or the largest, ...' until a citation can be found. I'll have a go and feel free to watch and backout and of my contributions if you need to. Thanks. Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:49, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Great to understand more, and I liked the point on the Drumm model, that's the sort of interesting little detail only a mass project with capacity like Wikipedia can gather in. Sorry re MoTD but a sacrifice in a good cause. That sounds like great editing, and I see in my watchlist that you've also been enhancing Malahide. The picture is especially good news, and the spinoff article, and the cricket point (I always wondered about that claim, knowing the ground), so yes, a whole quest opened up from that one visit to Malahide, and your own knowledge. I will scan over too, but it sounds like you've got it well in hand.SeoR (talk) 07:03, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. The most amazing thing was that when I travelled on the Princess Maud I just merely thought her an old ship with no stabilizers, I know I travelled on one of the few ships (and I really don't know how few) that was at both the Dunkirk evacuation and the D-Day landings! There's more to that article when I have the chance and I've a mind to try to get it to B-Class ... the ship was deserving of that ... (I normally only aim for between start and C-Class). But my scrapes continue .. I got an article for the production company of the most watched non-sport UK TV programme referred to in about 50 articles booted into draft for potential non-notability .... don't ask why I was creating that article in the first place! I originally did the Fry Model Railway article because had ended up doing a whole load of MGWR stuff following on frm Kilfree junction enhancement and Morton was as the GSR when the Drumm battery train existed (Or so a book I had loaned from the library said) and the Fry Model Railway was really an article to support the Drumm battery train And JJ Drumm. The Fry article also led to the Inchicore Railway Works article some while ago and also led me on chain which even resulted in my editing The Biggest Little Railway in the World‎ and a few TV programmes so its been a little sort of a sprint. Back to the Fry Model Railway ... The Malahide Residents Forum are receiving quarterly updates from Finglas CC. The November update wasn't really worth bring into the article though they are on track ... but they should be reporting in February/March 2018 that some significant action is happening. It should also show at some point on the Finglass planning Portal. Any appropriately licenced images of Fry or its models would be great for the article. I really only happen to have Malahide on my watch list through editing those articles to link to the Fry model railway. Thanks for your support. Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:20, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Category red links[edit]

My logic behind this edit was for the very specific reason that categories should not be left as red links per the WP:REDNOT guideline - if you think that an article should be in a category, you should create the category if it doesn't exist. Creating the category forces you to have a look around the category hierarchy and allows you to pick up on style differences like in/of as well. Also, the convention in category space is that the ROI is generally (not 100% admittedly) referred to as simply "Ireland" rather than ROI except where it's specifically being contrasted with NI - short category names are always good. I do normally create categories like this if they look plausible - I've created >20k categories - but I'll play the WP:REDNOT card if it's been a long day.... Le Deluge (talk) 10:35, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi! I must apologise, this was me doing an edit in transit, after a long day too, and I made a mistake in the name - it should have been National Museums *of* Ireland, not National Museums in Ireland, so the redlink was inadvertent, and I failed to do my preview and catch it. Sorry! I do understand that while redlinks can be ok selectively for articles, to provoke something needed, for example, they are not appropriate for categories. I was surprised myself to see an RoI category, but I guess its because for this specific category, Northern Ireland has its own distinct national museum system. Thanks, and best of luck with the next few k of categories, SeoR (talk) 21:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Waterford Crystal[edit]

I have to agree with your summery that there is little of substance for the most important period of the company. I do have a copy of Brian Havel's book, though he makes some errors, such as mixing up my grandfather, A director of IGB, and my father, who became technical director of Waterford. Also there is no index, so finding specific topics is not easy and it is quite sometime since I read it. As you see Ivana Bacik's grandfather was involved in the early days, as was the MD Noel Griffin and other prominent businessmen of the time. I met most of them over the years but we actually need reliably sourced material to expand the article. ww2censor (talk) 13:47, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, the article does little justice to the vibrant operation that was; there's more detail on the only-remotely connected predecessor works. When I think what that factory was like, and the visitor centre, and what it meant as part of Waterford, the greater "Irish brand," the world of trophies, just for example, and even as part of the ephemeral "O'Reilly empire." An example of an article written-up from the wrong perspective (I've edited it too in the distant past, but I think all those years ago I was sure someone would be back with, e.g. the book). Sounds like we need someone with a bit of time, and access to good materials. As ever with Team WP Ireland, a challenge of numbers; as far as I see right now, the core group on Irish articles is smaller than 20, with much time just taken up with keeping on top of admin and essential anti-vandal and copyedit work. Fascinating re. your own links; that small world again. SeoR (talk) 14:21, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Ireland is really quite a small place. As a young chap, I would travel down from Dublin when my grandfather had to go there for occasional board meetings when I might be given a grand tour and around the blowing stations one of the guys would do some fancy show-off glass blowing for the technical director's son!! Unfortunately there are few written sources, online has very little and WP:OR is not allowed. ww2censor (talk) 11:07, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
I came across this source but will look for more and post them here for the time being. BTW, are you in Dublin and do you have access to the NLI or Gilbert Library? Another is Irish Glass that covers the pre-1920 period in some detail. ww2censor (talk) 10:15, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Many thanks! I will try to take some time to study. I travel a good deal, but I do have occasional chances to visit the NLI or the Gilbert, and can try some digging of my own. The challenge is that it was a modern operation, so no big trail of scholarly works. but there is a fair amount in e.g. the Irish Times archives. Those sound like fascinating memories, thanks for sharing. SeoR (talk) 21:47, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Ireland Project assessments[edit]

I see you have joined the club of assessors. When you are rating article, and there are other unassessed project banners, you should add the class rating to them too at the same level. If it's a Start-class article it is so for all projects and may alert editors from those projects to give it an importance rating. BHG has found some 15,000 unassessed articles that now need importance and class rating, so anything you can do to reduce that is appreciated. I presume you're familiar with this table which allows you to get a list of the rating of article you might like to work on. If you are not using this rating aid User:Kephir/gadgets/rater you should do so as it makes rating very easy. The only problem I have discovered with it is that for the Ireland Project the "Photo" link does not function correctly: instead add an "image-needed" field with a "yes" for articles that could do with an image. Good luck and thanks. ww2censor (talk) 14:28, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ww2censor, yes, getting back in that saddle lately. It was actually something I did back in my early project days, when the Ireland Project article count was taken from just thousands (or less) to some early landmarks (current dizzy heights were scaled when I was largely on Young-Family Wikibreak). I also remember some debates (with yourself, Flowerpotman and others) about the relevant potential populations for Top and High, and so on. I noticed that the wonderfully clear chart was suddenly rising past 5k articles needing assessment, and dived in. I am indeed using the table, and have so far worked back from Z to U. The tool sounds great, as the process is a bit manual for now; I will go study at once. And thanks for the hint re. other projects, I was not sure of the protocol there, but now that you mention it, it makes sense that Stub and Start, at least, should be universal. On with U then,, thanks for the good wishes, SeoR (talk) 19:05, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
BTW, another page you might like to add to your watchlist and keep an eye on is User:AlexNewArtBot/IrelandSearchResult. ww2censor (talk) 21:27, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Many thanks, will certainly make use of that. Just back after a 4-day break, ready for more...SeoR (talk) 20:41, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Seo...I reverted one of your assessments where you changed "low" importance to NA. I see you've several othithers also. Why? Is it something to do with "class=redirect"? Regards Sarah777 (talk) 22:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Sarah, long time no speak, though I see you've powered ahead over the years (I was on young-family semi-break); the team has done so much good work (I remember when the big Assess push started). Yes, I took on part of the backlog of unassessed, and on the way, after clearing most of T-Z in one stack, noticed a small number of anomalies. Redirects are among these - they are not articles, and so should not have importance ratings. I was going to put a query, on the board, or to censor777, as there would also be the option to take the Project flag off altogether. But I think the best way is to keep them on watch, just Class=redirect, and if some day there is need to "bring back" a full article, then we can rate that article. SeoR (talk) 07:56, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
As ever, I am open to other perspectives. By default, most such cases would be low if they were articles (as otherwise they would not have qualified for Merge - I think of the ones I saw, maybe two dozen, all had once been articles). But I think the case for mere signposts, like redirects or disambiguations, not having importance ratings is clear. Warm regards, SeoR (talk) 07:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Waterford Glass again[edit]

Howdy, I just ordered an used copy of Waterford: An Irish Art from the US and hope to get it in a week or so. I'll see how useful it might be and if so will add some more to the article. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 10:13, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Hej! Great news. I've concentrated on assessments the last month and more, over 1k done, still (just) over 14k to go, but great to have substantive article work too. Ciao, SeoR (talk) 10:49, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 8[edit]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Alex O'Connell (fencer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Brentwood
Ruth Gilligan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Gaiety Theatre

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

William Ponsonby, 1st Baron Ponsonby - your reassessment[edit]

Perhaps you missed BHG's comment justifying the high-importance rating. I tend to agree with her. ww2censor (talk) 10:39, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi ww2censor, I saw the comment, found no details (the mentioned discussions being consigned to the recycle bin of history, I guess), but would be very slow to question any assessment by BHG, who must be one of the most experienced editors In all WP, and with deep knowledge on Ireland. However, having read around the topic myself (no claims to expertise, mind!), I thought a modest downgrade still seemed appropriate; Ponsonby played a major role, but was far from the only player, and all the key figures in the events around the Act of Union cannot be High prio for Ireland (High may be a little overweight in places, but is also missing some topics, and I think has a slight tendency to overweight on individuals). Of course I put a lot on your assessment too, so I'll roll this back for now - it was one of 12-15 reassessments, and we've so much else to do (I think I've passed reviews of over 2800 unassessed / partly-assessed items, but still over 12000 to go); there'll be more time for debates on subtleties maybe next year...SeoR (talk) 11:36, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
You can always drop BHG a note and see what she thinks. Indeed there are many unassessed article to do and you are doing a great job. I've been rather occupied so have not been doing very many. ww2censor (talk) 22:36, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind words. Then I did one more day and went offline for two, and only a little today, but back full bore tomorrow. For now a few old articles of occasional contention to check. Always interesting to see what else happens at one’s favourite cafe.SeoR (talk) 20:26, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
And thanks for the format fix on the Talk page, ww2censor- a funny error to have had on the page, but I rarely come here unless there is something live. Too weary last night to get far, especially with one article (a BLP one) which needs care, but I did look at progress, and set myself a goal to get Assessments Needed down below 11500 this month. Did that Waterford Crystal book ever appear, by the by?SeoR (talk) 10:40, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I noticed the odd page formatting, wondered if I could fix it and discovered all it needed was to close the "tt" tag with a forward slash. Indeed the Waterford book did arrive but we were in Paris, I had a load of carpentry to do, then I was in Ireland for a few days for my aunt's 90th, then back to France and have had, and still have, visitors, plus it been up to 36º on several days, so I've not much motivation for anything requiring anything above minimal concentration. ww2censor (talk) 14:09, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I did sort of notice it, but I think I put it down to some new function. I've been concentrating on trying to do a certain amount of assessment, and at least every 2nd or 3rd day, checking the Watchlist. Different reasons, much of it work, but similar results to yourself, need to keep focused. For some assessments I do a quick Google or similar to check depth / topic potential, but at least with, e.g. mass Stub assessments, a lot of it can be done without 120% concentration. Best of luck with the heat, trust no fires about. Waterford might fill some quieter autumn evening!SeoR (talk) 14:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
And we got down below 11500, though nearly didn’t, after a couple of hundred new cases, notably on greyhounds, arrived. Would be nice to get below 10k for end September... Let’s see.SeoR (talk) 06:06, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
That's a good aim, so I'll try to help out but we have had, and will still have, some visitors. ww2censor (talk) 11:40, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for that; I see some assessments. I've been in a heavy work period myself, but managed a modest amount, and 10k is still, just about, possible. I've also been blocked from this page on my corporate PC for some odd reason, hence the late update. By the by, one assessment, the Health Research Board in Ireland, puzzled me a bit - a Top article for WP Ireland? I would be thinking more the HSE only at that level, major units and hospitals Mid-High, but that's just me. Anyway, see you round the 11k remaining to go...SeoR (talk) 22:29, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
And now a third day when the links on the Assessment matrix don’t work.SeoR (talk) 06:55, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
And just to mark it somewhere, over the last 12 hours, we finally got below 10k unassessed articles (stub, start and fully unassessed), hurrah! SeoR (talk) 01:23, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Mahr citations[edit]

Hi SeoR, Thanks for checking my changes. I had removed "he recruited roughly 23 Germans" because it does not say where that happened. Was it for the Ortsgruppe? It was not for the museum. The links to the NSDP-AO (isn't it NSDAP-AO?) were removed because they are dead, both the current one and the one from the WayBack machine. A link is also not really required because it is in the Mullins book. Cheers, Strasburger (talk) 07:04, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi! First, thanks for working on this. Mahr was a big figure in a neglected corner of Irish cultural life, and whatever he was in some dimensions, he needs a better article. On the citation, I don't like to just delete, but replace, but I take your point. But then I think we must have another source beyond Mullins (I recall skimming the book, it seemed carefully and sympathetically writte, but there are also newspaper and academic articles, for example. Speaking of, the 23 recruits rings a bell, but certainly does need citation. I shall go have a look.SeoR (talk) 10:23, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
I see the article evolved further, will revisit as I meant to find and apply more citations.SeoR (talk) 22:30, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Capitulation of Dixsmuide[edit]

Thanks for taking a look - what needs to be expanded to make it a B? Robinvp11 (talk) 14:06, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for late comment, I've had RL and access issues. And sure. I felt it was fine on criteria #1 and #3-6, though an illustration of a more central figure would help, and of course there is always room for more referencing - but on #2 (appropriate cover and depth), which is perhaps the most important measure, I felt the coverage of the siege itself was very brief, most of the article is about before and after. Fine for a C, but B, at least from the way we apply the assessments in WP Ireland. I will revisit the article and see if I can tweak it a little, and I have no issues if someone else would like to review.SeoR (talk) 22:36, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
I trust your judgement but my problem is the siege itself is by far the least interesting part of it; I like chasing down obscure references, so I spent a lot of time but there's very little. Dixsmuide is a small place (as I said, only important because of its location); effectively, the French turned up and two days later, the garrison surrendered. William's reaction was the same as yours ie That's it? :) It's more interesting as a sign of the general war weariness prevailing by then. Robinvp11 (talk) 10:59, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Good point, thanks! And I understood better once I started reading the 3-volume William, and other sources, yesterday evening. Most interesting, and yes, I guess everyone, including the luckless Ellenberg, were getting tired. I will reconsider the rating then, relative to available / potential material, as there is an element of "what is possible" in ratings. SeoR (talk) 11:31, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Inspired by this, I've updated the article - shows the value of reviewing this stuff :).

Robinvp11 (talk) 16:54, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

It's great - the extra detail does flesh it all out nicely, including the siege / defence tactics but also the context and aftermath. A pleasure to read, and delighted to have helped inspire. SeoR (talk) 21:10, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

O'Reilly Foundation[edit]

I couldnt work out where it was based. Assistance appreciated. Rathfelder (talk) 20:09, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Not at all, happy to help. I will look at adding some wording with a citation.SeoR (talk) 22:31, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, SeoR. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Amy Siskind edit reverted[edit]

Hello SeoR! I was wondering why my edit of the Amy Siskind article was reverted. You give as a reason "uncited, unencyclopedic bracketed comment". Yet I copied the comment directly out of the Wiki[EN] article about "Mamaroneck, New York". The relevance of my edit lies in the fact that the place of residence is a defining aspect of a person's social class, which itself is a factor in the person's views and activities. I'd be happy to hear your opinion on the matter, and I'd like to ask for the reinsertion of my contribution. Best regards, FlugHund_SN2

Hello FlugHund SN2, and thanks for the attention, and for bringing it up for discussion. Taking a point about Mamaroneck first: the fact that this (possible) aspect of the area is mentioned in the place's article is not in itself significant - it might or might not belong there, and it might or might not be well-cited there, but whichever way, that does not mean it should be explicitly brought up in another article - if a reader wants to know more about this locale, they can follow the link to that article. And remember the Wikipedia does not self-cite, we seek outside sources.

However, the main point is that it really is not obviously relevant to this (short) biographic article. We do not, in general, mention that ABC is from area XYZ which happens to be broadly affluent, or poor, unless there is a clear reason. It could be, and often is, the case, that while a person lives in an area which is broadly of a particular type, they personally live in a sub-area which is of a different nature. And even if the area is of a certain "class" this may have nothing to do with why they live there, and say nothing about them. Now of course sometimes there might be a link - but without clear evidence, inclusion of such a point is speculative, and may be read as implying something which is not true. I'm afraid many would dispute that the place of residence is a *defining* aspect of social class, and social class is itself a complex construct. And assigning a social class label to a person requires really solid citation, and even then, for the large broadly-defined population sectors of most countries, could be controversial. In a long bio, there might be room to develop such a point, but Ms Siskind's is 12 lines of text, so not at that scale, and there are probably many other points that would be more significant to add first.

So in this case, the test is "what does the possibility that Mamaroneck as a whole may have a certain character factually tell us about Ms Siskind?" and the answer is, without solid materials to go further, "nothing." That means there is no encyclopedic reason to include it. That's before we weigh in whether anyone might infer anything else, or go deeper into Biography of Living Persons guidelines.

I hope this helps. Should you really feel there is a compelling reason to include this point, and after reading similar articles, you can see grounds, I would suggest opening a point on the article's Talk page. Best of luck in editing, SeoR (talk) 23:51, 26 January 2019 (UTC)


Thank very much for your extensive and clarifying answer! I'll keep learning... Cheers! FlugHund SN2 (talk) 12:59, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Luka Jović[edit]

Please beware of the persistent attempt to remove "Benfica B" from Luka Jović's infobox; that's the reason why the article is locked. SLBedit (talk) 00:24, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks SLBedit! I misunderstood the situation, and will be extra careful of that in future - and, as done this morning, will consider fact checks on subtle football article changes.SeoR (talk) 11:00, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

DOTY[edit]

Hey, no problems with that at all - I would have missed it myself if I wasn't watching the article. Carry on regardless! Deb (talk) 09:56, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

m:User:COIBot/XWiki/360gradkamera.de[edit]

Hi. Just to point to you that there has been an IP address that is being a little bit opportunistic with reference spam. I have removed it from some articles as it smells of CoI, though if you think that it is truly needed, please add it back. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:57, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks, I will keep an eye on that, and no, no re-add, if other eyes see value, I defer to that.SeoR (talk) 09:40, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Royston Brady, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Artane (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Pending edit to Arizona[edit]

My 'Pending edit' was reverted (here). This was intended to correct the reference error message generated by my previous edit: More than one of |website= and |work= specified. Note that my "fix" is more of a workaround -- if you can think of proper way to fix the error message, please do. Face-wink.svg. —2606:A000:1126:28D:3873:46A8:372F:FD65 (talk) 08:22, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, understood, but the workaround breaks the template syntax, so let me see if I can find another way, like a shared use of one reference.SeoR (talk) 08:37, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Okay. —2606:A000:1126:28D:3873:46A8:372F:FD65 (talk) 08:38, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Republic of Ireland[edit]

Surely it is not correct to state that the entity described as the 'Republic of Ireland' (the former 'Irish Free State' and now 'Ireland') is a 'country', and that it would be more accurate to define it as a 'state'? Nationality is based on the country in which one is born, and in my case I was born in Ireland (in the city of Londonderry), and according to the Belfast Agreement I am entitled to Irish and /or British citizenship.

However, if I had been born in the country called Scotland, I would be of Scottish nationality and be entitled to claim British citizenship; but given that I was born in a country called Ireland, I am of Irish nationality and thus can claim both Irish and British citizenship! Although I was born in the political entity called 'Northern Ireland', and given that no such thing as 'Northern Ireland nationality' exists, one has no basis for claiming Northern Ireland nationality or for that matter, the right to self-determination for this part of the UK! Of course, my Scottish counterparts, given that the country of Scotland confers the right of nationality on those born within its boundry, have the right to self determination (although they have not chosen to exercise this right in recent times).

The Belfast Agreement under the heading 'Constitutional Issues' may be helpful in explaining this matter in more detail. The following link can be followed if one so desires; https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf Ériugena (talk) 17:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. The main issue in this case is that, as noted in the editable text, this section of this article has achieved its current form after a great deal of sometimes difficult editing, and is pretty stable - and as a community, we ask that changes are first discussed on the Talk page. As to the specific point, there is no question, as a matter of either common usage or of law, that Ireland is all of a country (the term most people would use if asked for their first perception), a sovereign state, and so also a state. "Country" and "sovereign state" are both used in the opening paragraph, and both are better fits than the "State (polity)" article. I am familiar with the Belfast Agreement, but I think we would find that it - carefully, I am sure - avoids words like "country" and "state" altogether - but anyway, how we mention Ireland is more about common usage than legal technicality. The special provisions for citizenship are an interesting point, discussed in various Wikipedia articles, and relate also to yet another concept, that of the Irish nation. Anyway, all edits are welcome, and no one owns any article, so should you wish to make an edit to that article lede, please simply take a discussion on the article's Talk page; I am sure fellow editors will engage. Very best,SeoR (talk) 23:17, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Barnstar of Integrity Hires.png The Barnstar of Integrity
For keeping a completely fair and fact-based approach during my "very public" ANI. Britishfinance (talk) 18:03, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
Many thanks Britishfinance, I appreciate that. I try to keep it level-headed and polite to all, and am happy when that comes across.SeoR (talk) 09:57, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
It does! Britishfinance (talk) 15:52, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 7[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Arthur Guinness, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Artane (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you[edit]

Reviewer's Barnstar Hires.png The Reviewer's Barnstar
This is for your valuable efforts for reviewing articles under pending changes protection. Thank you PATH SLOPU 07:53, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Many thanks Path slopu, I wanted to extend my contribution and find this area satisfying, and a constant challenge.SeoR (talk) 17:41, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 1[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mahon Point Shopping Centre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cork (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Photo[edit]

Hello, i just wanted to ask why you approved this edit, since the IP doesn't won't state a reason for why there photo is better. thanks --SacredDragonX (talk) 19:50, 22 August 2019 (UTC) @SeoR --SacredDragonX (talk) 08:10, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@SacredDragonX: --- Hello, and sorry for the delayed reply, I've been working mostly on my mobile for some days. Good to meet you (and have I seen you in Pending Changes work too?). Anyway, the answer is simple - Pending Changes review / approval / rejection is not intended to secure the "best" content - it is merely a screening process to control vandalism and obvious breaches of policy, most notably around BLP ("The purpose of reviewing is to catch and filter out obvious vandalism and obviously inappropriate edits"). If you look at the log, for example, you may see some comments relating to this. So with the photo, all that was required was that it was not a joke or wildly inappropriate, and it passed - but anyone is free to revert the change as a normal edit, and improve the article in the normal way. Otherwise Pending Changes would become some kind of content arbitration. Hope this helps, regards, SeoR (talk) 18:06, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Lady Elizabeth Echlin[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Lady Elizabeth Echlin at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Nsk92 (talk) 11:32, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, and will address the comments there.SeoR (talk) 12:31, 13 September 2019 (UTC)