User talk:Donnchadh

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. As a member of the Wikipedia community, I would like to remind you of Wikipedia's neutral-point-of-view policy for editors, which you appear to have violated at Republican Sinn Féin. In the meantime, please be bold and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you! Please note that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a platform for your political views. Demiurge 12:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:NPOV and stop inserting the RSF POV interpretation of the 1986 ard-fheis into the Republican Sinn Féin article. Wikipedia is not in the business of pushing one side over the other; in controversial cases like this, we present the facts and allow the reader to make their own mind up. Demiurge 12:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * With regards to your comments on Talk:Republican Sinn Féin: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users."  Please keep this in mind while editing.  Thanks.  Demiurge 18:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for disrupting Wikipedia by making personal attacks. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. FearÉIREANN \(caint)|undefined 19:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

You might want to look at British Isles. A group of individuals are trying to push the myth that there is nothing wrong with the term, no-one is offended by it and any Irish people who are don't realise that it is a geographic term with no political implications or presumptions. FearÉIREANN \(caint)|undefined 17:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Mairéad Farrell
That was a terrible edit you made. You undid lots of stylistic and formatting improvements I had made. You changed 'She was the first woman to do so' to 'She was the first women to do so', for example. Please be more careful. Thanks. --John 13:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I see you repeated your bad edit. Another user has since reverted to the better version. Please remember we are here to make the encyclopedia better and not worse. If there are concerns about POV as you seem to think then the best way to address them is to discuss civilly in talk. --John 14:17, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense of EvidenceLink
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on EvidenceLink, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because EvidenceLink provides no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting EvidenceLink, 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 leave a message on the bot operator's talk page 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 14:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea what your talking about--Donnchadh 17:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)