User talk:Lordrosemount
Hello, Lordrosemount, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
- Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
- The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
- Simplified Ruleset
- How to edit a page
- Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Manual of Style
- Wikipedia Glossary
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.
Happy editing!
-- Sango123 (talk) 20:08, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)
Iranian peoples[edit]
Hi, I'm wondering how you can write that the article is "extremely well written" after reading my comments in the FAC room. Tony 01:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Duplicate images uploaded[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:John Honey window.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you uploaded the same image twice: as Image:John Honey window.jpg and also as Image:John Honey window.JPG. The latter copy of the file has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.
This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and remember exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 22:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
University of St Andrews Student Association AfD close[edit]
Thank you for your kind comments despite your disagreement with my decision. Yes, I was certainly aware, from reading the article, that the SA is not quite like similar organizations at American universities (although there is a similarity of function in that, while most students aren't members of such all-encompassing organizations, they usually do pay a "student activity fee" (or something like that) as a line item in their tuitition bills, which the school then gives to the primary student-government organization to disburse as it sees fit to various student organizations with more specialized functions. But I would say that the automatic membership conferred on all students, in addition to its legal mandate, argues against notability since neither the organization's existence nor membership are voluntary matters. It would sort of be like having articles on company unions (which, of course, we don't because they're illegal, in the US and probably the UK too, I'm sure).
The conference on heraldry is notable to the school and to heraldry, but it's a real stretch to me to say that the SA's heraldry is notable because the university hosted a conference on it. And the level of detail about the internal governance is a level of detail that's ... well, a couple of weeks ago I was exchanging email with some radio station promo director who had insisted that her stations' scheduling information (which DJ was on when) was notable. It's trivial. Keep summary style in mind. We've trimmed down overlong plot summaries not just for the copyright issues but because it's greater detail than the articles usually need.
As you admit, your arguments for keeping the article as is are largely based on your reaction to what I agree was not the best-faith AfD. Had the notability issues apart from the nomination not been raised by Mister Manticore, it might well have been speedy closed and kept. That's an unfortunate risk of AfDs. If the nominator persists in similar behavior in the future it might be worth it to consider an RfC.
I do not think that WP:IAR can be applied here as the greater good of Wikipedia is not at issue. See WP:WIARM: "It is not a trump card". I chose the merge and possible rename as the option that would best satisfy what editors in the discussion were coming to consensus on. A strict reading of policy would have called for a delete, but this debate would have been ill-served by such an absolutist interpretation when most editors agreed, even tacitly, that some of the information in the article was notable in some way, although it may not have warranted a separate article.
The next step, if you still would like to have this decision reconsidered, is deletion review. Perhaps someone might agree that the nom would have called for a speedy close, but since other issues were raised that may well be a moot point. But if you wish, go ahead. Daniel Case 13:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Again, thank you very much for your civil response ... I love the collegiality that ensues around here when we remember our obligations to our fellow editors.
The best thing I can tell you right now is perhaps bring the matter up at either Wikipedia:WikiProject Organizations or Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies). Basically, your question would be, are campuswide organizations at some institutions of higher learning inherently notable? I think you might want input from editors with experience at British or Commonwealth universities which have similar student-organization structures (i.e., some sort of legislative mandate and automatic membership for all enrolled students). Because, as you suggest, the same question is bound to come up with a whole host of other articles.
BTW, just curious, is the "Lord" simply in your username or is there an actual title involved? Daniel Case 14:47, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Dawsonowned.gif[edit]
Hello, I noticed you participated in the recent deletion discussion for the Owned article and an image in that article is currently up for deletion. Your input would be appreciated. --Pixelface 04:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Caitiline Article[edit]
yah, I've noticed... that's good... So it should be resolved sooner or later... Protection would be beneficial. Sure. anything to stop this senseless NPOV vandalism. --Patar knight 22:27, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Dead links[edit]
Hi Lordrosemount, if you come across an external link that no longer works, it's not necessary to remove it. As explained at WP:LINKROT, removing external links when they are being used as references can give the incorrect appearance that information is unsourced. Often tagging them with {{dead link}} will alert readers that the link no longer works, but that it once contained the relevant information. Also, there are websites which archive old webpages and can be searched such as Internet Archive or WebCite. Nev1 (talk) 13:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I hit undo and didn't change the edit summary enough. After hitting undo, which opened the edit window without your change, I changed the url to a version from the Internet Archive. I've not used WebCite myself, but Internet Archive (if you ever need it) is fairly easy to use. Just copy and paste the url that's not working any more into the site's search bar and if it's in the archive it gives you links to the old version. Then you can copy over the link to wherever it's needed. Nev1 (talk) 13:51, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
U r totaly right[edit]
I reacted a little bit emotional and this is not place for that.The fact is that Order recognized Independence of Kosovo.So ,If u need more informations how Christins (Serbian minority ) lives over there,you can check on Wikipedia article 2004 unrest in Kosovo.I will not put back deleted article.Thanks and have a good day. Knightserbia (talk) 1:00 am, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Midsomer Murders[edit]
I wanted to let you know that you ARE correct about John Barnaby not being on the show in series 4 (the year 2000). I think someone mistakenly corrected you because the actor that plays John Barnaby—Neil Dudgeon—was in the fourth series episode "Garden of Death". Gaiole (talk) 20:22, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that serious POV in the article. I have the article on my watchlist but I might have wound up missing it. Yours, Quis separabit? 12:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
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) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
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) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]
Hello, Lordrosemount. 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.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]
Hello, Lordrosemount. 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.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]
Hello, Lordrosemount. 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)
Please read The Right Honourable article, in particular, the section titled "Entitlement: According to the British government, the following persons are entitled to be styled Right Honourable: Members of the Privy Council [...] Peers below the rank of marquess [...] The lord mayors and lord provosts of certain cities (ex officio)
. Therefore, you are wrongly removing "The Right Honourable" from the infoboxes of baron/baronesses. You have only edited 6 such articles so I have restored the titles (you have likely received 6 alerts saying this). Please don't take offence at this, as it seems to be a common misconception. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 23:37, 22 November 2022 (UTC)