Talk:Thomas J. Scully

Article name changes
The article was originally at Thomas J. Scully. User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) moved it it Thomas Joseph Scully. User:Yaksar disagreed and moved it back. Then User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) moved it again, saying he disagreed with User:Yaksar. The presence of disagreement by this stage is obvious, and the proper course of action should be equally obvious. The onus is on the party wishing to move the article from its original name to propose the move via WP:RM. The party wishing to make this move is User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). Please use WP:RM for any future move requests to this article. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * How come doesn't abide by the same rule he demands in others. He moves Andrew F. McBride to Andrew McBride (politician). He then moves Andrew McBride (politician) to Andrew F. McBride (politician) and then finally moved Andrew F. McBride (politician) to Andrew F. McBride. All the moves were outside of WP:RM. He demands the use of WP:RM by others, but does not appear to be using it himself. he rationalizes it by saying my moves are controversial, but his moves are identical to mine, finding the best name per WP:Common as used in the most reliable sources such as the Congressional directory. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 20:37, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * But RAN, the net result of these moves was that I didn't move the page at all! It started at Andrew F. McBride and it ended up at Andrew F. McBride! Can't you see that I probably realized mid-way that the name was somewhat problematic and controversial, so I restored the status quo ante? Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:12, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * If you demand others use WP:RM and enforce that rule with a block, you should be using WP:RM for your moves. It is analogous to the cop that gives out speeding tickets who speeds himself or the minister who preaches abstinence whoring around. Practice what you preach if you want people to take you seriously. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 08:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I do use WP:RM for controversial moves I propose. I'm not sure if you didn't understand the process you referred to above, but when I realized the name would be controversial, I restored the status quo ante. In other words, no change was made. WP:RM does not need to be used for non-controversial name changes. Unfortunately, you have showed yourself unwilling or unable to recognize the difference between the two. When someone reverses the move you make, that's a good sign it is controversial. But here, when someone moved it back, you attempted to move it again without any discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Is there a new 1RR that applies to RAN?--Milowent • hasspoken 21:15, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Given his past history of repeatedly doing things like this and continuing to do them after being asked numerous times not to do them, he is on much shakier grounds than most users that might make a single controversial name move without discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)