User talk:Ardfern/Archive3

2007 Archive

Hawaiian and Aloha establishment date
I noticed you recently changed the Hawaiian Airlines and Aloha Airlines dates to place the articles in the "Airlines established in xxxx" category for the year they adopted their current name, rather than the dates both airlines started flying (1929 and 1946). I'm wondering what your reasoning was for this? Both airlines trace consider themselves as being established at the earlier date, note for example the "Sixty Years of Aloha" celebration that airline had last year. I'm reverting the changes. -- Hawaiian717 05:06, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I changed the establishment dates on these to be consistent with the way it is handled on the hundreds of other airlines articles. In the case of Hawaiian Airlines, Inter Island Airways was in fact established in 1929. It should have an article of its own detailing its work from 1929 until it became known as Hawaiian Airlines in 1941. The same goes for Trans Pacific Airlines (1946 establishment) and Aloha (1958). Perfectly logical and applied throughout the airlines area. Ardfern 18:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree that it makes sense for there to be separate articles for Inter-Island Airways and Trans Pacific Airlines. Yes I see there are some cases where there are separate articles, like the rather convoluted situation with the history of US Airways.  However, you'll note that USAir redirects to US Airways, and I think the situation with the Hawaii airlines is the same, where a company did little more than change its name.  I think when we have a clear case of a single corporate history, splitting it doesn't make sense.  Also note that US Airways is categorized in 1937, the establishment date for All American Aviation, and not 1996 when the current name was adopted. -- Hawaiian717 19:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

TRIP Linhas Aereas
I nominated this article for deletion because of notability concerns. Since you created the article, I thought you would like to know. Your input is welcome on the AfD discussion page. Stebbins 17:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Air Contractors
Hi

Thanks for taking the time to get our page up and running and the subsequent edits. Unfortunately some of the items that people have been posting recently as fact are mere speculation. The addition of 737 aircraft is such an example.

I've removed the 737 section and will ensure that fleet changes are accurately maintained in the future.

Thanks again

Graham GGosling —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ggosling (talk • contribs) 11:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

category about Hong Kong
Please don't add the category relating Hong Kong to category by countries. See here[]--Ksyrie 13:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Having your own page deleted
If you create a page, and before anyone else edits it you decide to have it deleted, like what seems to have happened with Category:Aviation in 1998, please put a   at the top of the page, in stead of blanking it. This will attract an administrator to it to have it deleted. Eli Falk 07:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Maritime incident by year
Hi Ardfen,

I noticed you spent considerable effort in creating the catgories maritime incidents by year. Although an interesting approahc I doubt whether this is truly a useful approach. I can imagine it is for years with a lot of high-profile incidents (WWII comes to mind), but especially for older eras you will end up with many categories consisting of a single incident; for example beasides Batavia (ship), how many other incidents from 1629 do you expect that will be added. IMHO such 1 item categories is a bit contrary of the ideaof categorisation; which is the combination of several or even many related occurences in order to sport a larger trend. Perhaps it may be more fruitful to merge some of the categories. E.g. incidents of the 17th century, 18th century, 19th century, 1900-1914, WWI incidents, 1918-1940, 1940,41,42,43,44,45, 1945-1960 and so on.... That would have another benefit, it would be much easier to maintain decent use of the categories. Just think about it. cheers Arnoutf 12:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, but maritime incidents is only a small part of work on Transportation disasters by year (already includes aviation and railway accidents and more to come). This is itself part of work on Disasters by year (including Natural disasters etc) all to fill out the disasters picture for each year. To group the incidents eg by century, negates work to develop each year. Hope this puts it in context for you. Ardfern 13:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Northern Irish People
Hi. I notice from some lists that you have been involved in adding people to some of the Northern Irish categories. Could I ask that you be a bit careful in doing so as a lot of people have been added to Northern Irish categories when they weren't from Northern Ireland, specifically all those who lived before 1920. I don't think it's good practice to add people to the Northern Irish lists who lived and died before the existance of the country, it's a bit like labelling everyone born in the old borders of Palestine at the beginning of the 20th century as Israeli because that's what is now there. Ben W Bell  talk  08:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

For people born before 1920 in the area that now constitutes Northern Ireland, are you suggesting that they should be categorised as Irish people or what? If so how do we denote their being part of the heritage of Northern Ireland, or their Ulsterness, or whatever you want to call it. Perhaps they could be categorised as both Northern Irish and Irish people?? Ardfern 20:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No I don't think we should be classifiying them as Northern Irish people, as they simply weren't. They may have been born or lived in the territory that later became Northern Ireland but they aren't as Northern Ireland had nothing to do with them. My point above about calling people born in western Palestine at the beginning of the last century being classified as Israeli is the same point, us deciding that these people are Northern Irish is making big presumptions on these people who for all we know may well have moved (or not) when Northern Ireland was created. I think they should just be classified as Irish as that's what they were. Presuming them to be part of Northern Ireland heritage just doesn't work for me due to the dates and differences in countries/states and the like. Ben W Bell   talk  21:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Schools articles
Your comments would be welcome on Articles for deletion/Sarina State High School and Articles for deletion/Arlington Country Day School. Both these articles have been expanded and sourced since the start if their AfDs. TerriersFan 22:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Aviation Newsletter delivery
The March 2007 issue of the Aviation WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 18:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

St. Patrick's Grammar School, Downpatrick

 * I have just reverted this article - the changes you made restored factual inaccuracies (eg the school does not play baseball and Pauline Lynch is a teacher at the school, not a former pupil). I have a son at the school and do know the facts. The internal headings were also to give structure to the article which it badly needs. Ardfern 23:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the inaccuracies my revert brought back. I still think it is unnecassary to have headings for so small sections, but since you obviously disagree I won't re-revert them.

A short comment on something you said in the AfD discussion: "School articles should be retained. Schools are important both locally and nationally." Every article needs to pass the policies Attribution and Neutral point of view. That means that some schools will have articles and some won't. Some schools simply have no published sources and that means that Wikipedia can't have an article on them.

Best wishes/ Pax:Vobiscum 09:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The Troubles in...
Hi Ardfern, I wanted to ask should the above articles simply contain 'two or more fatalities', or only contain 'incidents which caused two or more fatalities'? Specifically I'm talking about The Troubles in Kilrea (Talk) page. Many thanks, &laquo; Keith t/e &raquo; 21:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keith - When I started a lot of the Troubles in ... articles there was huge debate about listing all death incidents - incidents resulting in two or more deaths were agreed to be listed, but this does not mean that other major incidents (eg non-fatal bomb explosions for instance, which would be of major significance in a small town) could not be listed. See: Articles for deletion/The Troubles in Moneymore and Articles for deletion/The Troubles in Tynan. The Troubles in Kilrea article lists single deaths which it really shouldn't and is written in pejorative non-neutral language largely. The other articles all used CAIN as a reputable neutral source and were referenced, unlike this one. Strictly this one could be deleted as it does not cite any references. Hope this is helpful - I will add comments on the requisite talk page. Ardfern 18:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Ardfern, wasn't sure about the articles, and thanks for the comment on the article talk page. &laquo; Keith t/e &raquo; 15:21, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

The article 1333 in Ireland
I have nominated the aforementioned article for speedy deletion; the given reason is: The article's subject is a very obscure one and has little content.  ~  St ep  tr ip   17:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I realize that all articles start out as stubs, but, are there any surviving manuscripts, books, etc from that time period that would provide sufficient content to the article?  ~   St ep  tr ip   12:45, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The article has been made into a redirect per xoloz.  ~   St ep  tr ip   13:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ardfern,

I'm not really sure whether there is any precedent for a series "X (year) in Y (country)", but I hope you'll see how my first impression is that the idea is a wee bit impractical. Imagine 536 B.C. in Swaziland for a moment. :) We do have an article on the year 1333 and I am redirecting to that.  Why don't you feel the two major events in Ireland in that year are well-served at the year's article?  Best wishes, Xoloz 15:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Please do not re-direct - this is part of major work on developing Years in Ireland stubs (some 164 articles at least have been added). They are stubs and thus meant to be further developed - to re-direct makes the articles worthless in terms of Ireland and Irish history on Wikipedia. Note that UK (England and Scotland) and Ireland and other countries do have year by country article series (although Swaziland is unlikely to!). Please give this a chance to grow with the other Years in Ireland articles. Thanks Ardfern 15:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * How may folks belong to this project? When did it begin? I'm never one to stifle creativity, so I won't stand in your way any long, but I wouldn't be surprised if this effort didn't encounter some resistenceeventually, possibly generating a Request for Comment.  Have any of these years ever been through Articles for deletion?  Best wishes, Xoloz 17:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Aloha Airlines
I noticed among your updates to Aloha Airlines this morning that you added a fact tag to the end of the second paragraph. Can you clarify what in that paragraph you feel needs citation? Once I know what you're trying to get at, I'll see what I can find. -- Hawaiian717 17:51, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I added a number of fact tags to this article because it does not cite references for the material in the article - it is not attributable to a reliable source, which it must be as it states at the bottom of every Wiki edit page, otherwise it could just be opinion or even made up.Ardfern 19:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The history section I'll be able to get to in a few hours; I've got some print sources I want to refer to as well. My real concern was that second paragraph.  The bits about frequent flyer programs and Island Air codeshare are easily sourced from Aloha's website, but the part about flight lengths I'm not sure I'll be able to find a source for.  However, that information should be objectively and deterministically derivable from the routes shown on Aloha's site combined with a reference for distances.  -- Hawaiian717 20:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I just added a bunch of info to the history section. I could probably fill in some more of the recent history, but it's already past my bedtime. ;)  Maybe more in the next few days.  I added the sources (an Airliners Magazine article and the book Wings of Paradise) in the references section rather than trying to use footnotes, because it's pretty much all drawn from those two interchangeably and would result in an ugly mess. -- Hawaiian717 06:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Hong kong category
Hong Kong is regarded as a subdivision of China,so I removed the Category:Aviation in Hong Kong from Category:Aviation by country--Ksyrie 18:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

medical evacuation
Just wanted to let you know that it's MEDEVAC or MEDIVAC. BY the way does the FI fleet listing agree with the registration listing? Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 00:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, that was badly written. The end of the first sentence should be "...or MEDIVAC rather than Medevac. The reason for the question has to do with First Air, which has a different listing based on the company and what is registered with NAV CANADA. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 02:28, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I have been thinking about it and it would probably be best to have the Flight International fleet list as well. The Transport Canada (TC) listing is not so much the fleet but just the aircraft registered to a particular company. Here's some examples as to why I think both should be included (Transport Canda search page).

Aklak Air has a DHC-6 in the FI but TC says they only have a C185 and that was cancalled in 2001.

First Air has 3 BAe 748 in FI but TC says 5. Two of them are parked permanently.

Regional One and Canadian North. The last FI for Regional One gives 4 DH8's but TC says 5 (Regional 1 Airlines Ltd). In the past few weeks Canadian North has flown 2 different DH8's (FJFW & GRGO) into Cambridge complete with the Canadian North paint scheme. Yet according to the TC list they don't own any DH8's.

I think that the infobox should show the fleet as reported by FI and the line under the fleet section header should read something like:

"As of (date) the fleet reported by Flight International and the registered aircraft listing as reported by Transport Canada was:"

Let me know what you think. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 09:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 09:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Air Creebec
Just curious as to what was wrong with the reference for the destinations? I got it right from the Air Creebec site. I figure that it was hard to see as the only place I had it was in the infobox. The fleet listing was an error, it was supposed to include the reference from the October Flight International and I've added that back in. Is there an update in the current edition? It looks odd to have two versions of FI referenced. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Clearly the FI destinations info at 15 must have been wrong. Fleet listing in FI in 27 March edition is almost the same apart from 6 Dash 8 Q100 and 1 Dash 8 Q300. No problems with multiple versions of references - same publication, different issues - each reference is different. Ardfern 18:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Category:Aviation in Palestine
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Aviation in Palestine, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Aviation in Palestine is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Aviation in Palestine, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Category:Aviation in Palestine itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 00:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Flight Interntaional citations
I noticed an update you made today to Hawaiian Airlines included a rather vague citation to Flight International, using just the publication name and date. Would it be possible for you to use a proper full citation, as was briefly discussed a couple of months ago at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Airlines? Thanks. -- Hawaiian717 16:36, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Can't add much more than there is apart from page number. I am trying to amend and add refs for over 1600 airlines from the FI World Airlines Directory and life is too short for the full cite news (which is ok only for people making an occasional amendment - it should be made more uasable). Will amend Hawaiian Airlines accordingly. Ardfern 19:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The citation at Hawaiian is better, even just noting that its from the World Airline Directory is an improvement. Since it's something that could potentially be useful for virtually every airline article, perhaps you could make a template just for this source? -- Hawaiian717 20:00, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Flight International, Directory: World Airlines
I noticed you are updating some of the airline references with this. Is this a book? If so could you use the Cite book template or another cite template to better format the citation? Vegaswikian 21:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

My entries are derived not from a book, but an aviation magazine (one of the best known and most authoritative in the world). I am trying to update over 1600 airline articles from 3 editions of the magazine. Obviously this is very time consuming and the reference added is the best that time allows in the circumstances. Ardfern 22:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Once you formated one entry, it would be a simple cut and paste changing the page number. So after the first one, the amount of work is minimal, about the same as what you are doing now.  With the effort to use the standard cite templates for uniformity we should all try to support this as an effort to improve the quality of the encyclopedia. Vegaswikian 22:07, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * See citation in Ishtar Airlines - does this better meet the apparent need? Its the same as what I had, but in cite news format (there is no specific author, in case you think that's missing). Let me know, so I can get on Ardfern 22:55, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Ishtar Airlines looks fines. Vegaswikian 05:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Backpackers Express
A tag has been placed on Backpackers Express, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

This airline was due to launch in 2004 but was never able to get off the ground. See http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/travel/franciscakellett/may/partyplanes.htm

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kahuzi 14:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Aviation/Assessment/Biman Bangladesh Airlines
No comments yet on WikiProject Aviation/Assessment/Biman Bangladesh Airlines. Care to take a look? Cheers. Aditya Kabir 14:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

citation needed, citation needed, citation needed, citation needed, citation needed, citation needed, ...
Let me tell you that I find it extremely irritating, and I am guessing many others would too, that you had seemingly at some point inserted [citation needed] under every section in seemingly a large number of articles. I had thought that it must have been some idiotic imbecile bent on disrupting Wikipedia to make a point and who thinks that's really funny or something. Surely you need not be so extreme in asserting your viewpoint to cite references. For the sake of the readers' sanity, stop doing it. -- 129.78.64.102 20:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the abuse and sorry you find this so annoying, it must be almost as annoying as me having to deal with articles to which people have failed to add citations. It says "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable" at the bottom of every edit page ie content should not be added if it is not with a citation. You will also notice that all my inputs do have citations. I got with the programme, others should too. I don't think I'm the "idiotic imbecile" here. Ardfern 20:56, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think you see my point at all. I am saying that you are being extremely irritating and disruptive because you are putting the "citation needed" tags above every single paragraph in an article, not because you want citations for all the information appearing in an article. There is a tag that people put only at the top of an article with no citations. Why don't you use that instead, or create some tag that says "most of the article is unreferenced"? Or do you not see how seeing the tags everywhere is irritating by the normal Wikipedia reader, even if not so by its experienced editors at all?


 * It is only an honest plain truth that I thought it could only have been idiotic imbecile who would have done something like that, not from an active Wikipedian such as you with tons of edits. But it's your choice if you want to self-identify with "idiotic imbecile" and feel abused; I make no apologies if that's how you wish to misinterpret my words. -- 129.78.64.102 19:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The unreferenced tag you refer to, is only suitable where there are no references at all in an article, and I use that where appropriate. In many articles there are unreferenced paragraphs, which I seek to highlight (and which you find objectionable) and some with references (often refs I have added) and thus the unreferenced tag is not suitable. Surely not too difficult a concept to grasp. All Wiki articles are supposed to be fully referenced and intelligent Wiki readers would prefer to understand that the article they are reading has elements which are not referenced or sourced, but elements which are fully referenced and verifiable. Otherwise how can they trust the Wiki information they see. If all info added to articles was referenced, I wouldn't need to take any action. If only it were so. Ardfern 20:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Infobox and references

 * Your work on adding infoboxes in airline articles is good stuff, but is it possible to add references/sources for the IATA and ICAO Codes and Callsign. See eg AVE.com - originally the ICAO Code was referenced, but when it appeared in the infobox the ref was gone and the callsign has no ref either.
 * I noticed also that in other airline articles you had been marking some codes "not current" (without a ref), even where there is already a ref for the code in the article. Quoting the source would be helpful. Thanks Ardfern 20:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I dont put the reference in for the ICAO Code and Callsign in the infobox as there is only one reference for both the ICAO Code and Callsign for every article (the ICAO 8585 Document), it could be a bit repetitive! and the references can be found when you follow the ICAO and Callsign links. Unless you can think of a good reason to repeat the same reference in every single airline article then perhaps we have to agree to differ - dont get me wrong I think we have the same aims to improve and keep the airline articles up to date, so perhaps we should get a concensus in Talk: Airline Infobox ?

When I change the code to "not current", it is because it no longer officially allocated, I agree I should add a reference, although it is normally because it does not appear in the latest official document.MilborneOne 21:26, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

requesting references - observation
Whilst it is every editors right to request references, doing a considerable number of requests (as you appear to do), and especially without explaining the rationale may just give people the (mistaken?) impression that you are requesting them in bad faith or just cannot be bothered in improving wikipedia and want to run up an inflated edit count none-the-less. Djegan 23:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you haven't noticed but all articles are supposed to be referenced and verifiable - when starting a new article it even has this statement "Articles that do not cite reliable published sources are likely to be deleted". Thus explaining the rationale in each case is superfluous - writers should be following the rules. Your final remarks on my not being interested in improving Wikipedia or just in increasing my edit count are offensive and ill-informed. At least try and get some of your facts right or keep your negative jibes to yourself. Ardfern 18:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I stand by my comments. Djegan 18:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Many thanks - your reply is just about what I expected - anything is better than a reasoned response, eh. Ardfern 18:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I've just realised that for most of those articles I added "unreferenced" to, I also added categorisation (one of the other Wiki essentials), but perhaps you didn't notice that, or just think that adding categorisation is also simply to increase edit counts. Keep up the good work. Ardfern 18:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I still stand by my comments. Djegan 18:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Edited some of the content in Copa Airlines
Hey, I saw you restored information in the Copa Airlines page. The only thing is that the article from Flight International seems to be outdated. Copa Airlines flies to 36 destinations in 21 countries. Here is an article with a recent press release that explains this http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070702/mxm001.html?.v=81--Schonbrunn 22:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

There are other misinformations in that same article. Copa Airlines became wholly Panamanian owned in 1972, not 1971, and the Panamanian government never had a stake in Copa (since it owned Air Panama, its main competitor). Another misinformation is the year that Copa became public, it was 2005 not 2006 since their IPO was held in December that year.--Schonbrunn 22:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Happy for my supposedly outdated material to be replaced, but only if you have referenced material - not just your opinion. What is your evidence that the dates quoted are wrong? If they are, replace and add the reference. Ardfern 19:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Ardfern, thanks for your message. I corrected the information based on this link http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1345105/000136231007001226/c70706e20vf.htm#108

It is the latest filing that Copa Holdings (parent company of Copa Airlines) has filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In page 22 there is a history of the company with the information I corrected.--Schonbrunn 19:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I took on board some of your suggestions and have added references. You could do the same for the new reference you added - it needs to be presented in a certain way - see Template:Cite web and Template:Cite news or just copy and paste what I used. Ardfern 19:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I have added a reference in the Fleet section using the source you quoted - if you want to add more material or refs to the source just add after the entry and it will refer to the source. Ardfern 20:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi I changed some content on the COPA page, but Schonbrunn is taking me as a sock, since it appears that editing won't work for me, will you care on editing it yourself, I have also been accussed for Copyright infringement just for using a free image at the COPA page, I just ask this since I think they will hear you since they aren't hearing me.

AfD nomination of Pegasus Air
Pegasus Air, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Pegasus Air satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Pegasus Air and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Pegasus Air during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. ~  Wi ki  her mit  18:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Malaysia Airlines Kargo
I have nominated category for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Russavia 07:38, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Smile


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Is there a convention for Irish place names?
Hi Ardfern, i was told by user VintageKits that there was a Wikipedia convention that stated that all "Irish" place names must have the Irish version after it. Reason i'm asking is he threatened admin action because i moved the Irish for Tobermore (which i added to the article in the first place) to the section below the introduction (Location and Name Origin).

So basically my real problem is that suppossedly i can't move the Irish meaning to another part of the page or remove it from the page at all if i really wanted to. If there is a convention for stating that all Irish place names must have it straight at the start i'd like to see it as i feel their may be a loophole that they are using in it, i.e.

The convention may say Irish place names but then again does that cover the island of Ireland or the Republic of Ireland? I personally think the Republic of Ireland, but then again republicans see no difference. Republic of Ireland settlements are spelt in the primary official state language Gaelic, and yes they should have their official language stated after the English version, however Northern Ireland's official language is English it has no other official language spellings. Irish like Ulster-Scots is a minority language and is only used on place names by a minority of people. So in that regards if there is a convention i think that it is flawed. Mabuska 12:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Mabuska - I don't think there is a convention as such (but then Vintagekits doesn't suggest there is one), and I'm not a great one for being up to date on the rules anyway. However, to leave the Irish derivation would be good practice and consistent with other NI towns/villages articles. I think the way it is placed in the current article (ie both after name and in a section below) is absolutely fine. Adding the Irish derivation after the name is to explain the origin of the name and has no political or other significance. It is factual and helpful and in my view should be there. Leaving the article as it is should surely satisfy both parties?? Ardfern 12:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have no objections to it being there and agree with its usage, however i moved it to another section dealing with Tobermore's location and origins, as i didn't want to have repetition as well as to be able to clear up and shorten the introduction (hence the creation of the location and origin section). I just wanted to know was there a convention where it has to be right at the start instead of being in another relevant section.
 * On VintageKits talk page he said there was a convention when i stated my reasons for the edit however he has since been indefinately blocked for being extremely abusive and threatening and his talk page removed.
 * Mabuska 13:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Spam in Bookajet
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Bookajet, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Bookajet is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Bookajet, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 21:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Mexus Airlines
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Mexus Airlines, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Mexus Airlines fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason: '''no claim to notability. failed startup, shut down in 2006 without ever having gotten past the planning stages.''' To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Mexus Airlines, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 23:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Air East
A template has been added to the article Air East, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. Addhoc 17:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Biman Bangladesh Airlines
Firstly, thank you for your comments on the A-Class review of Biman Bangladesh Airlines. I have expanded the article quite a bit since the review in May and have submitted it for peer review with the intention of taking it to FAC soon. The article has had a thorough copyedit from a member of the League of Copyeditors (and more is expected) but I'd like to address most concerns before the FAC stage. I'd be grateful if you could review the article and post your comments on the talk page and any concerns on the review page. → AA (talk) — 09:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Townlands.
Hi. Can you please stop deleting the townland cats from a lot of the articles. You've prob got good intentions, but maybe you're not aware, but townlands are not the same as villages. A village can be both a village and a townland, it doesn't have to be one or the other. Thanks. Derry Boi 02:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I only took townland categories off a small number of articles that did not state they referred to townlands. I do, of course, know that they are not the same as villages - I created the separate categorisation for NI county townlands. In a similar vein, do you understand that a village is rarely a townland, but actually a settlement within a townland, so they are rarely the same thing, even though they may share the same name. Therefore my re-categorisations would almost certainly have been correct. Ardfern 18:12, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ardfern; great work on the "Townlands of County" category. You are on a roll these days! Noting the discussion above someone seen to think that Scotstown in County Monaghan is only a townland - they keep deleting the infobox. (Sarah777 20:20, 16 September 2007 (UTC))

Templemore
I notice you recently deleted some paragraphs from the article on Templemore. I'm curious as to why you did this. You did not leave any reason on the discusssion page. While not referenced these paragraphs contain truth. I do not have the references to hand but the main street is reputed locally to be the widest in Ireland and also the town was originally built by Sir John Carden.Rigger30 15:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

My apologies I didn't read your contrubution fully!! Sorry I notice by the way that you have been editing quite a number of towns good work!Rigger30 15:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Days and Dates
Hi Ardfern I see you are doing Trojan work the past week on Irish geographical articles about anywhere that has or had a railway station; and adding lots of bits as you go, eliminating vandalism etc. Great stuff! Just one wee quibble - in some recent articles you have started to link years and dates as in "on 25th May 1888 Clogherhead railway station was opened". I think this is contra MOS (at least that's the assumption I've been working on as I remove such links where I find them. I think you only link dates if they have some other specific relevance; like if the Fat Controller's birthday was on the 25th May! (Sarah777 22:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC))


 * Hi, Sarah777. Thanks for the kind comments. My normal practice is to link dates as I actually find it useful for context when reading articles myself. Linking takes the reader to the date year in question and helps put the article it appears in in time context for the reader. The MOS actually backs this up - I quote: "Wikipedia has articles on days of the year, years, decades, centuries and millennia. Link to one of these pages only if it is likely to deepen readers' understanding of a topic." My linking assumes the deepening of readers understanding for the reasons above. Hope this helps. Ardfern 20:04, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * If it deepens understanding fine; and I can (at a stretch) see how linking the year might - but the day??! Like, I posted this on 13th September! (Btw, you can call me Sarah; the 777 is disambiguation :)(Sarah777 21:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC))

Irish politics by county categories
Hi, I see that we have both been on the same track of creating politics by-by-county categories in Ireland! (Great minds think alike, etc )

However, I notice that whereas I have created Category:Politics of County Meath etc, you have created Category:Politics of Leitrim and Category:Politics of Donegal, i.e. without the word "County". Since most Irish counties have an eponymous county town, most by-county categories have used the word "County" for clarity. I know that by-county categories haven't used that format, and that some are inconsistent, but I think it's a good idea to include the word "County" for clarity.

Would it be OK with you if I speedily rename Category:Politics of Leitrim to Category:Politics of County Leitrim and Category:Politics of Donegal to Category:Politics of County Donegal? The categories are new enough that if it's OK with you, we don't have to go through a full CfD process. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem at all changing cats to Politics of County Donegal etc. This would always have been my preference, but I noticed a lot of authors had not followed this line. Ardfern 12:53, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'll go ahead and rename those categories.
 * While I'm at it, I decide to take a closer look at the other similar categories, many of which are called "stuff by locality". It seems to me that it would be better to standardise on a "stuff by county" format, and put them all in the new Category:Categories by county in the Republic of Ireland (which I just created). I reckon it would make these categories more accessible, and more intuitive; but what do you think? I'm happy to do the CfD nominations. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Excellent - I would also be much happier with by county in general than by locality.Ardfern 13:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, it's underway. See Categories for discussion/Log/2007 October 6 and a bunch of other similar nominations on the same page, with more to follow. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Media by county
Hi, I see that you also created all the subcats of Category:Media in the Republic of Ireland by county in the last few days. Would it be OK with you if I speedily renamed them, as I did with the politics categories? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. Ardfern 09:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, done them now. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Roads by county
See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Topic category rule
Hi Arfern, congrats on more great categorisation work. I thought I'd just pop in to explain why I had reverted your removal of Category:Ulster from County Antrim and of Category:County Waterford from History of Waterford. It's because of the topic article rule), which is an exception to the general principle in WP:SUBCAT of not putting an article in both a category an its subcategory.

It took me a while to get used to that rule, but I do think (now!) that it makes sense. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Categories moved
Hi Ardfern, just thought I'd drop a note to say that the first those of Irish by-county categories have now beenb reamed by the bots, i.e. those nominated at CfD on October 6.

There are more to be done, i.e. those nominated at CfD on October 7. I expect that they will probably be renamed tomorrow. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Starair
Starair, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Starair satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Starair and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Starair during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Russavia 16:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of East Timor Air
A tag has been placed on East Timor Air, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD A7.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Russavia 16:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Irish cricketers
Whilst going through the Irish cricketer articles, can you keep players who are in both the Irish cricketers category and the Northern Irish cricketers and Dublin University cricketers subcategories in both. This is because the two subcategories are only placed in Irish cricketers in lieu of having nowhere better to go. They do refer to different categories from the parent category. Andrew nixon 14:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Kilgarvan Article
Great Work on the Kilgarvan Article you really improved it by categorising it like that, the railway was a good mention and I will elaborate on it and add local bus services etc. in time to come. --Netwhizkid 23:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Ireland
Hi, doing good work there but please be mindful that the IMOS specifies Ireland with Ireland as the pipe and RoI as the link. I don't really want to have to follow all your edits making that correction - but, shure, you know I will! (Sarah777 22:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC))

Beechcraft King Air and Super King Air
G'day from Oz. I have noticed that you have created some articles about small aviation outfits. Some of these have linked to the Beechcraft King Air article when they should have linked to the Beechcraft Super King Air article. I realise that the Super King Air article didn't exist until the beginning of this year, but some of the articles were created several months later. Please look on this as a friendly "heads-up" that there are two articles. FYI King Air 90s and 100s are treated as belonging in the King Air article, while 200 Series and 300 Series King Airs are dealt with in the Super King Air article.

Regards YSSYguy 04:43, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Irish Wikipedians' notice board
Hi Ardfern, thought I'd let you know about this discussion in case you hadn't seen it. Stu  ’Bout ye!  20:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Conflicting styles
See diffs below from the article Kildare; as you two are amongst the most prolific contributors to Irish articles best get agreement on these style issues:


 * 1) (cur) (last)  17:58, November 10, 2007 Ww2censor (Talk | contribs) m (5,422 bytes) (removed unnecessary links - only full date are linked per MOS) (undo)
 * 2) (cur) (last) 13:03, November 10, 2007 Ardfern (Talk | contribs) (5,430 bytes) (Tidied up) (undo)

(Sarah777 18:40, 10 November 2007 (UTC))


 * Sarah. More than happy not to link dates (ie years only) and only link full dates (ie day, month year) if that is the correct position. Many thanks for the barnstar - only just noticed it - comments very much appreciated. Ardfern 18:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * You're welcome and deserve it! I'm happy with your current policy of linking the year only but I noticed that Ww2censor is reverting some of your tidying up as he follows you through the villages of Ireland! (Sarah777 18:58, 10 November 2007 (UTC))
 * Sarah got here before me but I am not actually following you around the Irish villages, only those that are on my watchlist though I see you have been active today including some of this type of edit. Anyway, I unlinked the individual years in Kildare and Malahide because it is only full dates that should be linked per Manual of Style. I used to link them too but when going through the featured article candidate process I was alerted to linking date other then full date was improper. I should also tell you that linking common terms is also regarded as unnecessary. I saw that you were linking town which seems quite redundant too but I will leave it up to you to revise your edits as appropriate when you have time. Cheers and good editing. Keep up the good work. ww2censor 23:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Admin
Hi. I'd like to nominate you as an admin, as I think you're qualified. Let me know if you're interested. Epbr123 12:23, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for the proposed nomination, but no thanks. I am interested in writing and developing articles, categorisation etc and improving Wikipedia, but not remotely interested in wasting time and energy on edit wars, morons and endless exchanges of messages. Flattered by your nomination, but life is too short. very best wishes. Ardfern 20:54, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey! Don't be so hard on us morons!(Sarah777 01:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC))

Unreferenced
Hi I notice you are tagging a lot of stubs on my watch list as "unreferenced" - example Kiltealy. Not sure what additional reference is required as the location is given, county and road(s) (both linked); a photo with the village sign. Regards (Sarah777 (talk) 13:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC))


 * - and the grid coordinates are supplied! (Sarah777 (talk))

Woodlawn, County Galway
Hi again, This place is waiting for you to add transport info. I think there is a railway thingy located here. (Sarah777 (talk) 00:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC))

Desertcreat
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Desertcreat, and it appears to include a substantial copy of. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 19:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Little context in King's Park Primary School
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on King's Park Primary School, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because King's Park Primary School is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting King's Park Primary School, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 01:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Colorado Airways
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Colorado Airways, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add db-author to the top of Colorado Airways. YSSYguy (talk) 01:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Abandoned station
Hi Ardfern, Does RailScot have anything to say about Kilbricken? - Sarah777 (talk) 16:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Category:2003 in Gaelic Games
Hi Ardfern, I saw that you had added Category:2003 in Northern Ireland as an extra parent cat of Category:2003 in Gaelic games. It seemed to me that if this was relevant to 2003, the same applied to all the other years, so I have reverted your edit but tweaked the GaelicGamesByYear template so that it will add each of the year in Gaelic games to the appropriate year in Northern Ireland category, if it exists.

It will take some time for the cache to be purged, so this won't initially show up in the other categories, but it will be spread across them over the next few days. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on 1731 in Ireland, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kannie | talk 23:05, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


 * This deletion is a bit quick off the mark and fails to take any notice of context, particularly my trying to add birth and death entries to Years in Ireland. I am adding content to all the Years in Ireland articles as I find it and will be adding more to this, as I will to other such articles. It also allows others to add content in the collaborative way that is supposed to be Wiki - deletion this speedy allows no opportunity for this. Please have a modicum of patience - this speedy deletion approach is a very bad policy when applied in this way. Ardfern (talk) 23:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on 1478 in Ireland, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kannie | talk 00:01, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Filling in the years
Hi Ardfern - where do you get all that Birth/Death information from? Good work - Happy....St Stephens Day! (Sarah777 (talk) 03:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC))
 * Hi Sarah, Happy Xmas to you. Many thanks for sorting out the tags put on some Years in Ireland articles. Every bit of date info I am adding is from existing Wiki articles. I am going thru all People from cats (eg People from Belfast, People from Dublin etc) and adding the birth and death details by Year. Incredible number of articles where no one has bothered to cross link to Years in Ireland and Northern Ireland. Eventually will also add them to Years articles in which Irish people are drastically underrepresented. You need to be a bit obsessive/compulsive for this!! Ardfern (talk) 11:32, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep - it's a bit of a grind but someone has got to do it! I think the series is probably safe from the taggers now that BHG is on the case! Regards -- Sarah777 (talk) 14:11, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

1612 in Ireland
A tag has been placed on 1612 in Ireland, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Already exists as "1612"

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. WEBURIEDOURSECRETS INTHEGARDEN  15:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * This is the note I have added to the 1612 in Ireland discussion page:
 * This deletion is a bit quick off the mark and fails to take any notice of context, particularly my trying to add birth and death entries to Years in Ireland. I am adding content to all the Years in Ireland articles as I find it and will be adding more to this, as I will to other such articles. It also allows others to add content in the collaborative way that is supposed to be Wiki - deletion this speedy allows no opportunity for this. Please have a modicum of patience - this speedy deletion approach is a very bad policy when applied in this way. NB this is not the same as 1612 itself. Ardfern (talk) 15:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Right, there does seem to be some confusion. I am not tagging this article because it is too short. I am just saying that your work would be better placed in 1612, and that a separate article is definitely not required. WEBURIEDOURSECRETS  INTHEGARDEN  15:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

BHGbot tagging
Please can you cast your expert eye over BHGbot's next job? See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland/Assessment. Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi BHG - couldn't find any subcats that were tagged - not sure that it worked (but it may just be me!). Maybe just as well, because if you tag Geography of Ireland subcats (and any other Ireland subcats), it will tag a load of Northern Ireland subcats (as in your list), which doubtless NI Wiki people will object to as they should be part of NI Wiki Project. This will happen because Ireland in Wikipedia covers the whole island and therefore both Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland subcats. A lot of Wiki subcats have Ireland titles, yet should relate to Republic of Ireland only (as there are Northern Ireland counterparts) - I have tried to fix some, but not all yet. Just something to consider - maybe the bot should only be working on Republic of Ireland subcats, or maybe first we should correct the overall structural problem (somehow!!). Hope this is coherent. Ardfern (talk) 17:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

See also BHGbot's next job: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland/Assessment. Your comments welcome! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)