User talk:Cordless Larry/Archive 4

Demography of Liverpool
Hi, as I am discovering more and more information about Liverpool's ethnic groups, I am having trouble on how to present this information. I do not know if it will look too long and complicated if I list each ethnic/national group. I have just added information about Greeks under other groups, but the information contained seems equally significant as the other groups which have their own subheading. What is you opinion on how to display all of this information. Stevvvv4444 (talk) 22:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well done on finding all this. I think the problem is perhaps that the selection of groups mentioned in the article reflects more upon what material you could find on them rather than their relative size (although the former is obviously partly related to the latter). It would be useful if we had an idea of the relative size of the groups, from a single source, which could then be used to judge which to discuss in detail. Generally, though, I don't think that you need to worry about there being too much material at this stage. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, but I don't think there will be one sourc giving figures on all ethnic/national groups, and 2001 country of birth data isn't particularly useful I don't believe. I will keep trying to improve it, and you never know it may need it's own article soon. Stevvvv4444 (talk) 22:20, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Tanzanians in the UK
Hi, I have left a message on the deletion talk page of the article, which I am sure you will know I would like keeping. I have completed a section on demographics and section on history of the community. I will soon get round to information about culture, community groups etc. Stevvvv4444 (talk) 14:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The International Organization for Migration reference convinces me of notability so I've said that I'm happy for the nomination to be withdrawn. Good work. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:46, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment
Thank you for pointing that out, it is confusing since the OECD figure is slightly lower than the US Census Bureau figure. Also, the latter of which includes all Americans of Barbadian ancestry, whilst the OECD figure like you said is for Barbadian born individuals in the US. both of the sources originate from the 2000, so is that saying only 1,000 people have been born in the US to Barbadian parentage (in comparison to the 53,000 odd born on the island)?? Stevvvv4444 (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The US Census Bureau figure that I've seen is actually lower at 52,170, from this document, and is for people born in Barbados only. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:51, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I now see the US Census figure for ancestry, which is 54,509. It is strange that there is such a small difference between the Barbadian-born and Barbadian ancestry figures. Perhaps the answer lies in the possibility that many Black Americans of Barbadian origin simply stated their ethnicity as African because that is a big category - 1,183,316 people. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:16, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Indian UK
Hi, I have sourced the new figures for Indians in the UK. The old figure of 1,200,000 is definitely out of date, since more than 1,316,000 Indians were reciding in England alone in 2007, I also put in the UK wide figure of 1,600,000 as it is the most recent estimate that also includes recent immigrants and any people of Indian origin in the UK (whether mixed with another ancestry or not). The figure of 1.6 million could be even higher since in the seven year period between 2001 and 2008, the Indian-born population in the UK increased in size by almost 35%. Stevvvv4444 (talk) 18:02, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I didn't doubt the figure, but it needed a source. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:05, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Brazilian UK
Hi, I'm not particularly an expert on things linked with visas etc, since you seem to know more than me if you think the section should be removed or reworded it's down to you. Whatever you chose is fine, becuase I am not really sure what I would put instead. Stevvvv4444 (talk) 15:51, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll reword that part. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:54, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Graphs
I realised the innacuracy with the one on the Colombian article, however I just created the Brazilian one and it does actually include every year from 1997. I will add it again now, I hope their aren'ta ny problems. Stevvvv4444 (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Hebrew
The translations were meant to reflect the broader history of Lincoln - the city that the University is based in. Its history is steeped in Roman and Jewish involvement. Although the translation is unofficial, the consensus on the ground (implying NOT the ONLINE community) seems to suggest otherwise. The purpose behind the editions were primarily to reflect the University's heritage. This is further reinforced by the use of MINERVA - note: Roman Goddess - as the official logo. Vivsaks (talk) 22:37, 7 April 2010 (GMT)
 * I've replied at Talk:University of Lincoln. Needless to say, I don't think Lincoln's history justifies you creating your own translations of the university's name. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Rawabi
can u please add the map and some pictures? http://www.rawabi.ps/masterplan.php?link=1&page=live

photo animation: http://www.rawabi.ps/gallery.php

thanks--188.225.180.251 (talk) 11:24, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that I don't really have time and I suspect that these images are subject to copyright in any case. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:33, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

don't worry about the copy write issue, i can send u an official email to do so from rawabi's mail doman.

if u don't have nough time to do so, please tell me how and i'll do it myself? thanks--188.225.180.251 (talk) 13:28, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Details of how to upload and use images are at Images. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

i would like to remove this statement as well: "The Jewish National Fund is donating 3000 saplings to the project, the announcement of which sparked some internal Israeli and Jewish controversy.[16]"

there is no need for it at all and it will offend others who donated thousands of trees to rawabi for not mentioning them as well.--188.225.180.251 (talk) 13:31, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * If you want to remove that text then you can do so, and make a case for doing so on the article's talk page if anyone objects. It's not up to me to make your edits for you. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

but everytime i remove it, "others" keep on adding it back and blocking me!

as for U.S. Senator John Kerry visit to rawabi, here is the reference:

U.S. Senator John Kerry Visits Rawabi, the First Palestinian Planned City

Ramallah, March 1, 2010 — U.S. Senator John Kerry, senior Senator from Massachusetts and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, visited the site of Rawabi, the first Palestinian planned city on Sunday. U.S. Consul General Daniel Rubenstein and R. David Harden, senior advisor to U.S. Special Envoy George Mitchell, accompanied Senator Kerry on his visit to the Rawabi site.

Senator Kerry, Consul General Rubenstein and Mr. Harden visited Rawabi to view progress made since early January, when construction was launched on the new city’s first residential phase and the central business district. Rawabi is the first Palestinian city to be built in accordance with a Masterplan. Braving intermittent downpours, the Senator and his delegation assessed from the work site the considerable strides that engineering and excavation crews have made on the challenging terrain, leveling rock road beds and preparing the site for utilities and underground infrastructure components. Palestinian and Qatari flags waved hopefully at the site entrance and from the cabins of the backhoes and bulldozers -- working in spite of cloudbursts and muddy conditions resulting from a period of much-needed rain. http://www.rawabi.ps/press_show.php?id=12&page=no

Thank you so much! --188.225.180.251 (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * If other editors are adding it, then that's a sign that you need to discuss your proposed changes on the article's talk page. Getting someone else to make the edit isn't going to make it stick if there is no consensus. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

census 2001
I would have appreciated it if you had left the text I added (albeit cribbed from the Welsh section) and put a 'citation needed' rather than delete it. What I wrote was added in good faith and hasn't been shown to be incorrect [yet :-)] I'm looking for references but know the gist of English nationality wasn't in the 2001 Census, just as Welsh was excluded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.223.2 (talk • contribs) 10:39, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Just found this reference:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1317035/Tory-MP-leads-English-protest-over-census.html

I'm not too familiar with Wikipedia editing, I will try to add back what was deleted and add the reference but it may take me a bit of time and not be up to the best standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.223.2 (talk • contribs) 10:46, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The reason I deleted it is that the standard for inclusion on Wikipedia is not that something should not have been proven incorrect, but that it's verifiable. I'm glad that you found a reference though. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:18, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Cities by GDP
Thank you very much for paying attention to what'd been going on with this list. Could you please kindly look into what changes SchmuckyTheCat had actually brought about... and decide what should be done with his edits? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.118.162.88 (talk • contribs) 21:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I took a look and User:SchmuckyTheCat's recent edits only seem to be reverts of unexplained edits to the article. If you disagree with this, you need to explain your edits or take the issue to the article talk page. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:22, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Afd
Hi - I didn't create it :) Mar4d (talk) 11:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi. I realise that - I was just notifying people who had contributed to British Pashtun as suggested at WP:AFD. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:59, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Tvrđa
The DYK project (nominate) 06:04, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Wiki-stalking
Please desist with your wiki-stalking activities. If you revert my edits again I will report you to WP:AIV. Cheers! Big sweaty Mark (talk) 15:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Please do so. I'm sure that your removal of deletion discussion entries will be judged as vandalism, rather than my reverts. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:11, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * One of these days I'm going to get you! Big sweaty Mark (talk) 19:47, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As you will now be aware, thanks to your being blocked, it's not a good idea to make threats such as that on Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:35, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Rawabi
Hi Cordless,

I know that it's not my job to tell you what to do, but you are the only one who can help me! if i make any edit on wikipedia, some "admins" misuse their authority and block me, just because we don't share the same opinion, and i find that very offending and not professional at all, moreover, it gives a very negative view about wikipedia.

I want to do some change's at rawabi's page, but i am sure, that when i do these changes, they will revert them back and block me!!!

can you please do the following for me: this paragraph is written on Rawabi's page: "Rawabi is 9 kilometres (5.6 mi) northwest of Ramallah,[2] 3.5 kilometres (2.2 mi) north of Birzeit, 20 kilometres (12 mi) to the north of Jerusalem and 25 kilometres (16 mi) south of Nablus. The Jordanian capital of Amman is 70 kilometres (43 mi) to the east of Rawabi.[6] On a clear day, it is possible to see the Mediterranean Sea and the Israeli coastal city of Tel Aviv from the proposed site.[7]"

I want to change it to the following: "Rawabi is 9 kilometres (5.6 mi) north of Ramallah. The town of Birzeit, home to one of Palestine’s reputable universities, is less than 3.5 kilometres (2.2 mi) km to the south of Rawabi. Rawabi is 20 kilometres (12 mi) to the north of Jerusalem and 25 kilometres (16 mi) south of Nablus. From the hilltops of Rawabi, one has a panoramic view of the Mediterranean's eastern coastal line, located 40 kilometers (25 mi)to the west. The Jordanian capital, Amman, is70 kilometres (43 mi) to the east of Rawabi."

and here is the link/source: http://www.rawabi.ps/maps.php?link=1&page=no

another article was published few days ago about rawabi: Architect eyes tony Palestinian city with eco-mindset and fast Internet http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2010/0514/Architect-eyes-tony-Palestinian-city-with-eco-mindset-and-fast-Internet

can you get the pictures and maps and add them to rawabi's page?

thank you so much! i will really appreciate it--188.225.180.251 (talk) 08:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

under the obstacles, i would like to add the following:

"Some 60 members of right-wing youth movement arrive in the Palestinian town of Birzeit at dawn in bid to establish a colony in the area Ramallah area. The teens announced their intention to establish a colony named "Beer Zayit" in the area in response to a Palestinian plan to build a new city called Rawabi."

link/source: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3870243,00.html

Thank you so much. much appreciated--188.225.180.251 (talk) 08:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but I don't want to make edits on your behalf. It is the contributions to Wikipedia that are judged based on policy, not the editor who makes them so asking me to make your edits for you is pointless. If you are finding that other editors don't agree with your proposed changes, then you need to discuss them at Talk:Rawabi and reach consensus. It's not surprising that you get blocked when you use edit summaries such as this. Please see WP:NPA. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:37, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Here is the link/source: "From the hilltops of Rawabi, one has a panoramic view of the Mediterranean's eastern coastal line, located 40 kilometers to the west." http://www.rawabi.ps/maps.php?link=1&page=no --188.225.180.251 (talk) 13:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added the distance since that seems uncontroversial. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:26, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

But i would like to replace this sentence: "On a clear day, it is possible to see the Mediterranean Sea, 40 kilometres (25 mi) to the west,[6] and the Israeli coastal city of Tel Aviv from the proposed site.[7]"

with this one: "From the hilltops of Rawabi, one has a panoramic view of the Mediterranean's eastern coastal line, located 40 kilometres (25 mi) to the west."

and here is the source: http://www.rawabi.ps/maps.php?link=1&page=no

--188.225.180.251 (talk) 14:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That would be a copyright violation since the wording is exactly the same as in the source. It would have to go in quotation marks, which seems silly when we already have a perfectly good sentence that says the same thing. I don't understand your problem with the current wording. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:54, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Since Rawabi's official website does not mention "Israeli coastal city of Tel Aviv", I would like to remove it! and just to keep the Mediterranean's eastern coastal line!--188.225.180.251 (talk) 06:40, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but the BBC News website does mention it, and the BBC is a reliable source. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:17, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

The BBC says "On a clear day you can see as far as Tel Aviv and the Mediterranean."

so, let's just keep it the same as is and remove "Israeli coastal city of" --188.225.180.251 (talk) 14:19, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * But the fact that Tel Aviv is a coastal city is important because it links the fact to the previous one about being able to see the Mediterranean. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

there is not point of mentioning that tel aviv is an israeli city?! wikipedia reads r not stupid and they knoe where it is located! so there is no need to mention "israeli"

in addition, that is not mentioned in the source!

moreover, the vast majority of the palestinians still use it's original name "tel Alrabie", before they were ethnic cleansed from that city, and changed its name after the creation of the zionist state! --188.225.180.251 (talk) 11:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Why, then, does the mention of Amman need the description "the capital of Jordan"? Please make your case at Talk:Rawabi, as I have no interest in discussing this further with you here. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:31, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Somalis in the United Kingdom
I see you have removed references about crime and terrorism in this article. This is surprising given that these are some of the most prominent features about Somalis in the UK. You also removed the bit that said they had the highest percentages regarding unemployment etc. This is allow comparison to other ethnic groups. And the MP bit, which shows even politicians are talking about this. Also 250000 is the general estimate, rather than a maximum estimate. I hope you can make the appropriate changes, rather than sanitising the article. Christopher Connor (talk) 22:26, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I removed your sweeping statement that "Somalis in the UK also have issues regarding Islamic terrorism". That isn't appropriate language for an encyclopedia. I left the material about crime in, although I removed a now dated statement by a single MP, which was refuted by the local police. I removed the comparison since the source only compared the employment rates of the largest country-of-birth groups in the UK, so to say "by far the highest figures among any ethnic group" isn't supported by the source. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * My issue with the 250,000 figure was that you wanted to describe it as the "true" estimate, when there is no evidence that it's any better than any other estimate. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:53, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Lift and strike (Bosnia)
Do you think the article should be renamed to "Lift and strike"? The disambiguation page does not link to other articles that actually use that term in the article name. This article should be treated as the primary topic and the disam page should be moved to "Lift and strike (disambiguation)". -- ◅PRODUCER  ( TALK ) 12:59, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I remember that when I started the article, I'd initially thought that the term was unique to the Bosnian use, but then found that it wasn't so set up the disambiguation page. I'd be happy for them to be swapped over. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:02, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Re:United Kingdom accepted revision
Yes, sorry about that. It was my 1st use of the review tool so I wasn't exactly sure what I was doing there but I do relise that I did that in error, a bit much exuberence on my part. My apologies. The C of E.          God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries. It is a bit confusing. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:55, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Shaun Keaveny wiki
There has been some errors. I will monitor it. Please be aware I am in contact with Mr Keaveny and correct any errors he mentions.

Micons (talk) 08:21, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not really sure what this has to do with me. Perhaps you could explain? Cordless Larry (talk) 10:37, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see that I put a welcome message on your talk page. Do you need help with something? Cordless Larry (talk) 10:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Singular teams
Responded to your message on my talk page. Thank you! --UnicornTapestry (talk) 15:45, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: Results breakdown of the United Kingdom general election, 2010
Sorry, just come back from two weeks holiday! Yup, your edits look totally correct, good job. I've complained to the BBC (harumph) about their inaccurate reporting but they just weren't interested. ninety:one (reply on my talk) 20:04, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Original Research
Coordless Larry

Here are a variety of sources on what is currently going on. It has not gone to court yet as its a recent issue. However I am citing articles from the Guardian as well as the guide from the Border Agencies own web site

The fact that children of only British Mothers must follow registration shows there is already a difference ie discrimination! There is no guide for those born of British fathers

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/applicationforms/nationality/guide_ukm.pdf

Please read the following article on the Gurdian http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/jan/28/british-citizenship-discrimination MPs site http://garyallanach.blogspot.com/2010/02/uk-citizenship-equality.html Campaign site http://www.turberville.org/IND/campaigns/ Harriet Harmans Tweet saying the inequalties would be removed but haven't http://www.election-tweets.co.uk/election%20tweets/HarrietHarman/tweet/10933538436 Ndirect govenement site http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/index/travel-and-transport/travelling-abroad/passports/who-is-eligible-for-a-british-passport/nationality-groups-who-are-eligible-for-a-british-passport.htm

There has been no court case - The point we are trying to make is that it is blatant discrimination and are trying to influence the change in law. If not there will be a court case soon to try and get this fixed. However if you read the contents of your own page then you will see that a whole group are treated in a different manner. It does not require intelligence to work out the inverse of what has been researched.

A new law was bought it in that was suppose to equalise things. However it requires different processes of applications and one of them requires fees and the other does not even require fees or even handling by UKBA staff but only by Passport and ID department. The issues here are paths to citizenship that are different and this is based on the various methods of application. Say for instance a 4 children are born abroad to the same parents but at different times. If one is born in 1960 to a British Female citizen then they have to pay reg fees and undergo good character checks. If the other sibling is born in 1983 then they are automatically British and do not have to register and can simply apply for a passport. However these rules will not apply if the father of the children were British. If that is not gender and age discrimination then I guess I am living in a fairy land! It does not require a court case to point this out nor is it original research. If you read the very article I had been trying to add to then you will see its actually blatantly mentioned right on it

My edits have been removed/deleted on three attempts without reference to the facts. It seems an unfair attitude to not even read the contents of the rules of your own article and draw the conclusions from it even though the differences are shown on it. Evaluate the laws in terms of Age i.e. someone born between 1948-1983, then descent through male or female lines and you can easily draw your conclusions from it and that is not an opinion I am afraid like it or not. This is my last chance to make myself heard after which I will give up as it appears your attempt to stick to facts also likes to obscure the facts itself!

--Jmortoza26 (talk) 20:36, 23 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmortoza26 (talk • contribs)
 * I've replied at Talk:British nationality law to keep the discussion centralised. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Mexicans in the United Kingdom
Hi, I am considering adding a section about Mexican culture, cuisine etc. to the article. This would include information on Mexican restaurants in the UK as well as the popularity of Mexican food in general. Corona is the most obvious example ofa Mexican beer that has broke into the UK market, and I'm sure there are many other Mexican businesses with a strong base in the UK. I am just not sure if you or others would see some of this as off topic, although I'm sure a lot of information could be adapted and made suitable for an article on Mexicans and how they have contributed to British culture?? Stevvvv4444 (talk) 21:25, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I removed a similar section from the article before it was redirected to Latin Americans in the United Kingdom as a result of Articles for deletion/Mexicans in the United Kingdom. I don't really see how the popularity of Corona has anything to do with Mexican migrants in the UK. That's like saying that McDonald's should be mentioned in the Americans in the United Kingdom article. If there are some notable businesses run by Mexicans in the UK then they might be worth mentioning, however. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:34, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Latin Americans in the United Kingdom move
There was no discussion on this move at all, and I have to say I disagree with the title 'Britons of Latin American origin', many Latin American-born people living in the UK would not consider themselves 'British'. The title is also completely odd compared to the naming conventions of other articles about ethnic groups in the UK which have been discussed numerous times. This should have been brought forward in a discussion and SamEV should have at least had the decency to change the rest of the article so it reflects the title of it (i.e. the only place said said 'Britons of Latin American origin' was the title whilst the remained of the article still includes the term 'Latin Americans in the United Kingdom' - a term which I believe could include any person of Latin American origin in the UK regardless of birthplace). Stevvvv4444 (talk) 17:56, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's not great that the move was made with no discussion, especially since the article name has proved controversial in the past. The problem with "Latin Americans in the United Kingdom" is that it suggests that British people of Latin American ancestry are somehow still more Latin American than British, so I can see SamEV's point. I just don't think the new title is necessarily much better (and perhaps even worse). Cordless Larry (talk) 06:59, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

ONS labour market stats
Hi Larry, you posted on the noticeboard a while ago asking for comment on the ONS' employment stats. It looks as if the debate you were having re: Somalis has moved on, but I wondered if you'd seen this ONS doc on concepts and definitions? Regards, --Pondle (talk) 14:18, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I hasn't seen that but had seen similar things on the ONS website. I'm pretty familiar with their employment statistics but was having trouble convincing another editor that they were correct. Thanks for your concern. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi
Hi there, I'm a new football player and I want to make a page for me. My name is Ziad Seklawi, you can see my official fan page on facebook, www.facebook.com/kunseklawi. Please let me make a page and stop deleting it :) Take Care. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zsiklawi (talk • contribs) 15:40, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * In order for the page to be kept, you need to demonstrate that the subject meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines by providing relaible sources on the topic (in this case, yourself). Please also see WP:AUTOBIO on writing an article about yourself. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:44, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh ok.. And I should be added on this squad as number 11 www.facebook.com/FC_Universitatea_Craiova —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zsiklawi (talk • contribs) 15:56, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source for that other than Facebook? Anyone can write anything on Facebook, so it's not considered a reliable source. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:10, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I think there is on Nikefootball.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zsiklawi (talk • contribs) 16:18, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

RE: Spurs
I apologize, I have little knowledge of the football world and I AGF and I am awfully sorry for any inconvenience I have caused. I will note that in the future. Many Regards, Yousou (talk) 12:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries, and no need to apologise. It's a common problem that (usually anonymous) editors try to add players to team pages when they are on the verge of transfers, but before the move has been confirmed. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:00, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

2010–11 Tottenham Hotspur F.C. season
Yeah, sorry about that, probably should have had a word before I did it, The main problem I had was the format, with it in the same line, I felt it enlarged the column a bit much just for the 3-character scoreline and didn't think it was too big an issue, The scoreline layout (home or away on a Tottenham only page) has been a confusing problem, do you put them all Tottenham scores first but then will some people think Spurs had 38 home games, etc? so I definitely see your point, I've added the (H/A) back with a br, hopefully that should be ok, cheers Prem4eva (talk) 12:45, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll be honest, I don't, On the Tottenham and the Tottenham season page, there has been a big increase in (good faith) i.p edits over the summer, if you look at the very recent history after mine, an i.p removed Gallas' squad number, then returned it to 13 again?, there is no evidence for a semi-protect so I thought I would just save a headache by taking a gamble, I've removed the squad numbers from Sandro and Gallas, hopefully someone can confirm them soon, nothing more annoying then reverting the numbers on the back of a shirt, I'll add a note to the squad list and team page if there isn't one, cheers Prem4eva (talk) 13:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I think what the IP did was to add Gallas, realise he was already on the list with a squad number, and then remove him again. Anyway, thanks for sorting it out. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

ble, didn't see the duplicate table, might help if they explained themselves with a proper comment instead of using that stupid tag thing which 9 times out of 10 seems to be vandalism to me. Govvy (talk) 11:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries, it had me confused at first and I was about to revert it myself until I realised what had happened. I don't think the edit summary tag is a matter of choice, I think it's added automatically to flag up possible vandalism. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Forth Rail Bridge bit
Okay, I can't argue with that. - Denimadept (talk) 15:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I was rather familiar with WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV because of a recent dispute on the NPOV noticeboard. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

African immigrants to Sweden?
Any chance we could change the name of this article to "African Diaspora in Sweden"? I oroginally named the article that but this was changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VsanoJ (talk • contribs) 16:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll do that now. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:16, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, well I did and the move was reverted. If you want to make an argument in favour of the move, you should do so on the article's talk page. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks....Wiki writer "Middayexpress" seems to have a huge problem with the whole term "African Diaspora". I have tried to talk to him, but he inisist that people of the African Diaspora in Sweden should go on different pages, something like "African Americans in Sweden", "Afro-Caribbeans in Sweden" etc, etc. While I have written Wikipedia articles in the past, they have usually been about footballers, bands and film. So I really feel that I am out on deep water here. The main source in the page is "African diasporas in Sweden: An unfinished history", written by human raights lawyer Madubuko Diakité of Lund University. As soon as I had written the original page, "Middayexpress" started to edit out evvery reference to African Diaspora. There are many similar pages on Wikipedia for the African Diaspora in other nations. As I said, I have mostly written much "softer" Wiki texts. (I do not think it is too much of a strech to include the current Swedish prime pinister, he has african ancestry - - even if it is through his great grandfather who was African-American).


 * I know I am rambeling. Basically I originally wrote an article about "African Diaspora in Sweden", now it has become an article about immigration. Yes, immigration IS part of the African Diaspora in Sweden "story", but the original text was to give a broad overview. I cannot see how Diakité academic text, as I used as a source was ruled out.


 * Thanks for helping me out.
 * VsanoJ (talk) 20:29, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I suggest that you make these points on the article's talk page. That way, more people will see it and hopefully participate in the discussion, allowing a consensus to be reached either way. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Scott Sutter
Nice to see him do well, he went to the same school as me. :) Govvy (talk) 22:29, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Not too well tonight, thankfully! Cordless Larry (talk) 22:30, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * heh, true that, but still, I think it's cool seeing my school name in his bio. Govvy (talk) 22:32, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Guidelines Re' Quotes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Composers/Copyright_guidelines; discussed in Tony Judt discussion page Mwinog2777 (talk) 01:24, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've responded at Talk:Tony Judt. I have that page on my watchlist so there's no need to post here about it as well, but thanks for the heads-up. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:10, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Premier League work fields
With regards to this diff and the many others I think you are wrong. Those work fields are perfectly acceptable and provide further information that would be of use to readers. I had gone through the refs as a result of reading through this discussion. Where is the discussion that says they are wrong? or could you explain your reasoning to me? I am now just getting rather frustrated with the endless tweaking of refs which are clogging up the edit history. Regards, Woody (talk) 14:31, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Template:Cite web states that use of the "work" field is for the following: "If this item is part of a larger "work", such as a book, periodical or website, write the name of that work". I don't see how "HM Government" or something along those lines counts as a work by this definition. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:36, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * From my edit, you'll also see that the fields were being used inconsistently. For example, one reference included "publisher=HM Courts Service|work=HM Government", while another used "work=Office of Fair Trading|publisher=HM Government". Cordless Larry (talk) 14:41, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Make it consistent then, don't remove it, or tell me and I will fix it. If we take the example from the aforementioned discussion: * This scales particularly well to Government publications from smaller Government departments. The work is OFT, the publisher is the Government. Woody (talk) 14:45, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I consider the OFT, for instance, to be the publisher, and the OFT to be part of HM Government. I don't really see the need to list the latter as the publisher, and I don't accept that a government department is a "work". But feel free to revert my edits. It's up to whoever completes the FAR to decide whether the fields are being used correctly, at the end of the day. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:49, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I was confused as well although reading that discussion clarified things for me. I have reinstated them now in a consistent manner. It is not for whoever completes (do you mean the FAR directors?) the FAR to decide MOS or stylistic issues, they don't have a better understanding than anyone else. They are simply there to determine consensus amongst reviewers/editors. Good point actually, I will copy this over to the FAR now. Woody (talk) 14:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand that they go on consensus. What I was trying to say was that I didn't want to impose my view of how the references should be formatted, but wanted to leave it to consensus. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:59, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * PS: I think that there might be a problem with one of your links above, which is displaying as but which I think you might have intended as a reference. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:05, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed the link. Fair enough on the closure, I must have misinterpreted your understanding. It was your referrals to the "whoever completes," I took that to be the FAR director, my mistake. Regards, Woody (talk) 15:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's fine, it was my fault for not being clear. I'm just not that experienced with FAR discussions and would like to get input from those with more experience rather than trying to suggest that whatever I say is correct on this issue. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:45, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Peer review/Somalis in the United Kingdom/archive1
I have made comments at the peer review. Christopher Connor (talk) 07:31, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've seen them. You make some good points. I would like to see a review from an editor who has not previously been involved in the article, though. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:33, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm probably not going to be able to look at it either today or tomorrow. Not sure about after that, but I will try. Since you've posted it at PR, it will probably get at least one more review (maybe mine but maybe someone else's). Finetooth (talk) 14:12, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. I asked because you did a good job with British Cypriots, but I understand if you don't have time, especially since it's a longer article. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:52, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

J. M. Coetzee and the IP
I happen to be watching this article. While it is true what you say about the Reference section, you could have created a Further reading section where the IP (IP talk page) could have left his sources, without having to use them in the article. Of course, his additions were badly formatted so that could have been another reason to remove. Christopher Connor (talk) 16:14, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. I was planning to investigate the sources the IP added further when I got time, because I've been keen to expand the article for a long time now and new scholarly sources are always welcome. When I get round to doing so, I'll either add them as references or to a further reading section, as you suggest. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:37, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've now added a further reading section. I could only verify the existence of one of the articles on the journal's website, however. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:59, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for UK City of Culture
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 12:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

List of castles...
Hi, Larry. Thanks for your message and correction. Mistakes happen sometimes. If I make something wrong in future, please do correct it. Regards, Silverije (talk) 18:56, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries, and you weren't the only one to have made that mistake. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:32, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Assessment with Wikiproject: U.S. public policy
Thank you for assessing with the PPI, assessing with this project will probably be different than other assessment you have done in Wikipedia. It's different because the many of the articles are stub, start, or C class, and we are not working to assess long lists of articles, but will have multiple reviewers assessing the same set of articles to take a more in depth look at assessment in Wikipedia and defining what is article quality. Please go to the WP:USPP Assessment page to find more details and  your assessment page with the first group of articles for you to evaluate. Thanks and happy editing, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 21:38, 30 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Cordless Larry, thank you for assessing articles in the Wikiproject: United States Public Policy. This project is probably different than other assessment drives you have worked on, it involves more assessment of lower ranked articles, it has input and staff from the foundation, and specific goals to improve and measure content of public policy articles. It also involves collaboration from some university classes, we are using an experimental assessment rubric, and most articles will be assessed by multiple reviewers to get a range of scores for each article. I have learned a lot from many of the  assessors comments and am really excited about the insight from this group of Wikipedians. I hope you are finding some benefits to involvement in this project. 1) your assessments are part of research that is attempting to increase credibility of Wikipedia in academic circles, 2) there is a great group of assessors involved in discussion of what is article quality and how to measure it, 3) WP:USPP is also piloting the Article Feedback tool, so if interested, those involved in assessment on the project will be asked to help improve and rate this tool as well, and 4) subject matter experts are assessing articles alongside Wikipedians and comparisons of results will provide some insight as to the rigor of Wikipedia quality rating.


 * To give you an update on assessment, about half of the assessments are complete for the first part of this first assessment. I had some trouble finding public policy experts to join us in assessing, but finally managed to recruit a group last week, hopefully some of them will join the discussion on the assessment talk page. Next week, I should have some preliminary results to share with you, I will also post the second assessment request very soon. The discussion on the talk page is very exciting, and I hope if you are interested, you will provide input on the Article Feedback Tool which is being piloted on articles in WP:USPP. Please let me know if there is anything I and the project team can do to make working on this project a more positive experience. Thanks again, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 23:47, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Editor review transcluded
Hello there. Sometime in the past, you requested an editor review, but you forgot to transclude it onto the main page. Thus, you may have been wondering why no one gave you any reviews. I have now transcluded the request, so please check back in a while for reviews. During the meantime, please consider reviewing another editor. Thanks. If you have any questions, feel free to message me. Netalarm talk 23:18, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I must have gotten carried away answering the questions and so forgot to transclude it. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Tofutwitch11
T ofutwitch11 ''' (T ALK ) 12:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

PPI Assessment Update
Thanks for contributing to WP:USPP, your assessments are a part of a deeper look at assessing article quality in Wikipedia. The quality and rationality behind the assessment scores by the Wikpedians on this project is really impressive, it is an insightful and knowledgeable group. There is some information about preliminary results of assessment data on the project assessment talk page, I hope you check it out and add your thoughts. There is also an additional article assessment request for you. This assessment set will wrap up the first experiment which analyzes the consistency of the quantitative metric and compares subject matter expert assessment to Wikipedian assessment.

The second experiment will start in November and you will be asked to assess articles and also provide feedback on the Article Feedback Tool. The results of that experiment will compare your idea of article quality to the ranking from the Article Feedback Tool and your input will help improve that tool. I hope you enjoy being a part of this research, I am pretty excited about the results so far, and am looking forward to continuing to work with you on assessment. ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 21:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Cordless Larry, thank you for contributing to article assessment for WP:USPP. Your assessments are very appreciated. In large part due to your input, there will be weekly updates about the research for this project posted here, look for the first one tomorrow. The next assessment request will come in early November. There is a lot of expertise and discussion about article quality happening in the project, so stay tuned. ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 01:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Tvrđa
Unfortunately, the GA nomination has failed... Do you plan to address the points from the GA review and re-nominate? It's certainly salvageable and I'm willing to help with the "present day" section. GregorB (talk) 12:28, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I noticed that. I'd be happy to work on it further. I can address the points from the GA review regarding the style and structure of the article. I suspect that adding a present day section would require Croatian-language sources, so your help with that would be much appreciated. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:37, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly, Croatian-language sources will be required (and, hopefully, sufficient) for that, like the one I've added this morning for the Archaeological Museum photo. I have a few comments regarding the GA review and the ways to address it, so I'll add them to the article's talk page shortly. GregorB (talk) 12:49, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks. We can discuss the improvements there. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:00, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Done a bit of work on the article today. Looks good to me, but it may take a while, this is perhaps 20% of work I was planning to do. GregorB (talk) 17:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good. If this is only 20 per cent of what you can do, I'm looking forward to the final product. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:48, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The article is ready for GAN #2. Are you going to renominated it soon? Kebeta (talk) 19:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I will do soon. In the meantime, I've put a tag on the article where the statement about Tvrđa's population is, because the figures aren't supported by the reference given. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:58, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Irreligion and ethnic groups
I wonder if you would care to weigh in the discussion here, where 'irreligion' as been added to many ethnic group articles. See contributions. Christopher Connor (talk) 15:25, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've added my comments on the issue. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:01, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Next WP:USPP assessment
Hi ! Since Amy Roth's out on maternity leave, I'm pushing out the next round of assessments she needs. This time, we're comparing your assessment to readers' assessments. And instead of us assigning you articles, we're letting you pick! The full list of topics is on a subpage of the Assessment tab on our WikiProject. Please choose 10 of the articles to assess. Use the link in the section title to go to the appropriate version of the article.

Also, as a thank you for all your help, I'd like to send you a small package of Wikipedia swag. Please email me your postal address.

Please let me know if you have any questions! --Ldavis (Public Policy) (talk) 21:51, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Happy Cordless Larry's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, click here. Have a Great Day... Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 04:28, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks - very kind of you! Cordless Larry (talk) 13:30, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You're quite Welcome! :) Keep up the Great Work! :) -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 17:46, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Romántico (film)
Thanks for the first citation. I hope you approve of how the article has been improved following your lead.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:35, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Brilliant! No one could claim it's not notable now. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:44, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Glad you think so, as it's what I do. What struck me as worrisome, is that the nominator DID properly tag it for concerns... and the tags might easily have led to the article being improved over time and with community effort through regular editing... but only 2 minutes after so tagging, he changed his mind, decided it as unsalvable, deleted his tags, and nominated it for deletion. Again, sure glad you found the source you added, and gave clues at the AFD for the easy follow up. Best regards,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:32, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Kiswahili wikipedia
Thank you for the information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwenemucii (talk • contribs) 22:54, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

black people in France
hi,i agree, i think its a real good idea to make a different page titled ((black people in france))  ((notable  people)).I never created a page before is it ok if you can make the page.thanks  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lastemperor8899 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I've replied here. You can post any subsequent replies there. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

black people in England
hello larry. i see you follow the black people in europe articles alot,maybe me and you can  make these articles better since i also have an interest in this subject.i have been of lately editing the black people in France article but i am going to be also editing black people in England as well.for example i can contribute to the  black british sportspeople article which currently has about 360+   biographies,i can eventually easily build this up to over 1,000 biographies since i know of so many biographies who are not in that article.also i think i will leave the black people in france article alone since its rather taboo and controversial,since you are british  whats your take on the stance by editors of wikipedia by discounting almost 500,000 mixed black and white from the official  tally of black  british population since other european countries  include the mixed race demographic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lastemperor8899 (talk • contribs) 07:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Please feel free to add people to lists, but note that you should include references to reliable sources. You might want to read WP:V and WP:EGRS on this. The latter is about categories, but I think it also applies to lists and other articles. I have a problem with classifying mixed-race people as black. If you do that it begs the question, why not classify them as white as well? It sounds like a case of hypodescent to me. Anyway, you should raise that issue at Talk:Black British if you want to propose it. You should also make sure that you are aware of the different between England and the UK as a whole, which your comment suggests you might be conflating. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:50, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

FARC Belgium
Thank you very much for the tags. I'll work them out. Vb 08:32, 26 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.193.121.110 (talk)

Third WP:USPP Assessment
Hi ! Thanks so much for your help on the Public Policy Initiative assessments. I really appreciate all your help -- we'll be in great shape when Amy gets back, thanks to all of your efforts! The next round of assessments is ready for you to review. Like the previous round, please pick 10 of the articles to review from the list, and it's especially critical that you use the version I've linked to for these.

This round measures the baseline quality of articles before our students started working on them. Many of these articles have undergone drastic revision already, so it may not be useful to leave comments about them on the talk pages. We'll be asking you to review the same set of articles once students have finished them too, so please be sure you're using the links provided so you're getting the versions immediately prior to when the students made their first edits. Ideally, these assessments should be completed by December 1.

I anticipate this taking a lot less time than previous rounds, as many of these articles are quite short. If you have extra time and want to help, please go back to round two and do a few more assessments -- especially on any articles that have only one or two assessments completed. I need a minimum of three assessments for each article, and some of the articles farther down the list still need attention.

Once again, thanks so much for your help and let me know if I can clarify anything at all! --Ldavis (Public Policy) (talk) 18:41, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Cordless Larry, just wanted to ping you on this -- our third assessment is almost complete, but there are still a handful of articles in which we need another assessment. Any chance you'd have time to get to that this week? Thanks again so much for all your help! --Ldavis (Public Policy) (talk) 18:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I've been busy these past few days but I should be able to do a few this evening or in the coming days. Thanks for the reminder. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I've made sure that all of the articles have at least three assessments. I'll try to do some more if I find time. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much! I really appreciate it! --Ldavis (Public Policy) (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC).

Congratulations
Tvrđa is a GA. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 10:49, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I just noticed myself. This is great news and wouldn't have been possible without your and GregorB's recent hard work to greatly improve upon what I had started. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:54, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Congratulations Larry, it's been a pleasure working with you and Kebeta on this article... GregorB (talk) 10:59, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Specialized Stumpjumper
Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

liverpool economy
It was reported on 08-12-10 that Liverpools economy is the fastest growing in the UK outside of London.

can this positive update be incorporated into the Liverpool page under Economy?

thanks,

Lee. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.104.164.19 (talk) 12:57, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * If you have a reliable source, I suggest that you could add it to the article yourself. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:48, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I would if the article was editable, but it isn't.

Can you add: "As of 08-12-2010, Liverpool has the fastest growing economy of any major UK city outside of London."

Source:  http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/ldpbusiness/business-local/2010/12/08/liverpool-had-fastest-growing-economy-outside-london-in-2008-92534-27790121/

Thanks, Lee. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.104.164.19 (talk) 15:18, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I understand now but can you request on the talk page of the article that someone makes the edit? Instructions for doing so can be found here. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC)