User talk:CuChulainn~enwiki

Fair use rationale for Image:TL JKS SPS TOC.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:TL JKS SPS TOC.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 02:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:ShortListPhoto.jpg
At the talk page of the image you have stated: "The photographer has reconfirmed his permission for this to be used under a free licence." Fine, but exactly what license did he permit it to be used under? For a list of available licenses, see Image copyright tags. - Mike Rosoft 10:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

File:TL JKS SPS TOC.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:TL JKS SPS TOC.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Damiens .rf 19:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

File:ShortListPhoto.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ShortListPhoto.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Damiens .rf 19:33, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

re the Straumford entry on Canadian colonies and its author.
I don't think I've ever launched an ANI before. Please see here and note that I feel the Straumfjörð article should just be deleted as rank original research and synthesis, and an atttude of rank WP:OWN by its creator and principle author. I hate procedural stuff, as it is and as you know my time has been unwontedly consumed by RMs and CfRs this last couple of weeks (to the detriment of my getting at my extra-wikipedian writing contracts and loss of a client, though that's my mistake for allowing Wikipedian b.s. to consume my energies). The Canadian colonies template needs a name-change and serious revisions and some strict enforcement of what can and cannot be on it. I mean, if we put every Norse item that Farley Mowat talks about into Wikipedia, we'd have a hundred such articles as this one. I'm glad this author doesn't know about Mowat's West-Viking, in fact, though it's a fascinating read......Skookum1 (talk) 15:03, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Complex RS issue for what I see as a needed BLP article
Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.Skookum1 (talk) 15:59, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

re guideline "discussions" on NCL/NCET
I quoted you here. The resistance to change that we are getting in this "forum" is same inane, repetive wheedling since in the recent RMs, and also in last year's. To me, consensus has spoken and there are passages and wordings in both NCET and NCL which clearly need changing/removal.....discussing things with Kwami is pointless, he will always point the finger at someone else and try and wikilawyer; do these have to go to RfC or what?Skookum1 (talk) 05:58, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

So long, and thanks for all the fish
By the cant that I'm seeing at the ANI on me, and by dint of Uyvsdi's cherrypicking of my retorts to Kwami's ongoing sniping and evasion at NCET, and the statement "if you speak again you will be blocked", it appears I may not have another chance to thank you for your wise and capable decisions per Lillooet and, last year, per St'at'imc. By morning (my time, it's 2:32 am in Koh Samui where I am), I may well be banned unless enough sane people who respect me and aren't threatened by my extended style of argument speak up on my behalf. The ANI is a witchhunt and ANI seems full of contrarians who relish their power to get someone tossed out.....I've been trying to keep working despite the harassment in the RM and now at the ANI and have tried to address the guideline/consensus issues and enlist others into that discussion. The solution to this is apparently to throw me out so I cannot speak ever again....is that really what's good for Wikipedia? Kwami will be laughing in his beer.....his BAITing technique used against me in last year's RMs was so successful he taught it to others....even if I am banned those guidelines need revising and changing.......I took the time to launch all those RMs to fix what had been caused by their abuse......my comments about linguistic colonialism per the claims that Canadian English is subordinate to what American and UK "global usage" sources say I may have to save for a different arena......my main sense of the ANI is that if all those voices criticizing me for not writing in a manner they will condescend to understand would actually go look at the RMs/guidelines and take part in the discussion or just change the guidelines to reflect the new consensus it would be a LOT more productive than seeing out the door, with a boot on the ass, the long-time editor who made a point of bringing them to the forefront...I have to teach in the morning, this was an afterthought after tonight's 4 hours of wasting time defending myself, when that mere act of defence/defiance will be used to block me, I just wanted to thank you for being a sane and thoughtful closer who did take the time to read and digest what I have to say, instead of TLDR me and use me as the reason to close opposite to what was needed. There are many who support me and have when I'm absent begged me to come back.....and I did. But there are clearly those who regard me as a threat, either content-guideline-agenda wise or intellectually, and they appear to be the most entrenched and the least likely to do anything on a well-informed or thoughtful basis.......it is totally ridiculous to have people who can't read long paragraphs throw someone who can write them out of the writing of an encyclopedia......remedial reading should be required for people who toss TLDR around like a club....as a club.

Anyways, thank you, I doubt you have reason to speak up on my behalf but I've done what \I can to try and bring back order and proper titles, Squamish has to be revisited ultimately......|I'm pretty happy to see St'at'imc and Lillooet back to where they should be...and it's obvious to me that Kwami never took the precedent of St'at'imc to heart, as per his defence of Chipeway and Slavey, both not just incorrect but derogatory to boot.......Whatever; my demise is probably a done deal, and the of must 'crucify him, crucify him" votes has probably already started......Skookum1 (talk) 19:50, 5 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Also in need of revisiting is Talk:Haida people, which I wish you had closed instead of BDD, who for some reason allowed a questionable PRIMARYTOPIC claim there that he did not acknowledge else; it and Squamish people, by the time the dust settles, will be the two out-of-place NCL-spawned titles remaining in BC FN titles......even though the primarytopics is very clear for people actually who know something about the one case, and the ....and the name ambiguity with the PRIMARYTOPIC of Squamish being the town remains unanswered to; there had also been an RM at Squamish and Squamish BC to address that, that got shut down by people opposing me just to oppose me and/or citingt primarytopic claims they are in no position to judge or know anything about.Skookum1 (talk) 20:03, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

the consensus you observed in the RMs..can't remember which one it was you articulated it, but....
This is going to get a hostile edit/reversion....Kwami made a false claim that "Canada is an exception", many of the items you and BDD and others have moved to "sans 'people'" were in the United States; on the talkpage at that guideline they (K and U) have been resisting CBW and I about what the guidelines say, and what the RMs have established as "consensus". Consensus on the NCET talkpage is at this point impossible; the RMs Kwami tried to shut down, and now presumes to quote (re Southern Tutchone, or Northern) as if he hadn't been the one to move them to "+ people" is typical of his shifting stand, he now claims only apply to Canadian peoples; he's also among those who maintain that CANSTYLE and ENGVAR and Canadian English are irrelevant in face of alleged "global usage".....

so hoping you might watch that change, it's likely to be an edit war, given Kwami's obstinance and U's outright hostility to anything I say or do. Consensus has spoken, as you put it, they want "consensus" to mean they have to agree, and they have no intentions of agreeing; but in RM after RM, their claims were overruled and out-argued, and they just don't like that at all..... I may be banned before this is all over.....note Doc's comments about how all my 82,000 edits, 60% of them in article space, can be reverted once I'm banned........all because I dared to show them up that their pet guideline was wrong and wrongly used and I suppose to prevent me from filing yet more RMs (Europe and Australia and other countries have them too - "+ people" items...and dig around, it's Kwami that did 80%-90% of them......also re "Elbonians", which on the talkpage he maintains is "FOOs" not "FOO", the reality is that nearly all indigenous names are plurals also, whether in "English" form or native (e.g. Sioux/Lakota, St'at'imc, Gitxsan.....you just don't see "three Gitxsans" for example...you might see either "there were four Haida on the dock" or "there were four Haidas on the dock"......I just added the singular, already in the table, in the line about what is acceptable (all forms). .Skookum1 (talk) 14:21, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Canadian English amendment proposal
Re CANENG and ENGVAR, please see my proposed addition/amendment to Canadian English. Floydian made an interesting observation, about how many Canadian wikipedians are vs how many are in WPCANADA...not that those 2000+ Canadian wikipedians work much on Canadian topics...maybe they don't. But it's typical of Canadian lack of involvement in their own affairs, as he observes, e.g. re election turnouts. So far no one has responded to this, I think it's a worthwhile change and is directly from TITLE.....give or take some shifts of syntax....the point is to make it more clear, so it can't be claimed (as it has been) that CANSTYLE is only about punctuation and spelling. How does it become 'front page'.....a vote?Skookum1 (talk) 14:39, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called CuChulainn. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name CuChulainn~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:13, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 11:48, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Request for input
Please see WP:ANI. Your input would be appreciated. John Carter (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of The Irish American Arts Awards for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Irish American Arts Awards is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/The Irish American Arts Awards until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 20:52, 7 July 2020 (UTC)