User talk:HighKing/Archives/2011/November

CS Lewis
I just wanted to bring to your attention and other editors that Mabuska, Jon and Goodday (and the usual suspects) are refusing to change this author's nationality from British even though he was born in Ireland and claims that was Irish, they refuse to engage in consensus, even for not even mentioning nationality, could you and the others help intervene. Sheodred tried to help but he was harrassed and accused of being a socket as a diversion to the POV pushing of other editors.93.107.209.165 (talk) 18:11, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Abbey Cheese Company


A tag has been placed on Abbey Cheese Company requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  Ol Yeller21 Talktome  19:32, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ardagh Castle cheese


A tag has been placed on Ardagh Castle cheese requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  M    Magister Scienta talk  (17 November 2011)  18:12, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Ardagh Castle cheese for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ardagh Castle cheese 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/Ardagh Castle cheese until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Mt king  (edits)  22:23, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Is this how you feel about a title?
I would like if you could please to answer on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland_Collaboration or here in response to my comment about the degree of feeling you have whether the title Republic of Ireland being wrong, to see whether it falls under WP:TITLE as a non neutral name. We just need to see if what a couple of people say there reflects reality or not. Thanks. Dmcq (talk) 12:23, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

IECOLL and 'disruption'
The way I see it is this: open any archive on WT:IECOLL, scroll down a bit and you’ll find almost this exact exchange:
 * Party A: We need to find a way to reach a consensus on how article names are to be changed.
 * Party B: But I don’t want any article names to be changed. And what’s more, I’m in a majority.
 * Party A: You’re being disruptive! You’re trying to wreck consensus to stop article names from being changed.
 * Party X makes some inane and irrelevant comment.
 * Party Y says everybody should stop fighting and go home.
 * Party A: So anyway, how do we reach consensus to change article names?...

A could not be accused by a neutral of incivility; B could be accused of borderline incivility. But more importantly, B is perpetuating the cycle and thus ensuring that a consensus will never emerge. If you want to break this cycle, you have to accept that A will never break it by saying "yes, please tell me how I should go about changing names." Only B can break it, either by saying "yes, I understand your position even though I disagree with it", or better still by not responding at all, since no response is required. If the cycle was once broken, and there were no hotheads eager to start it again, then reasonable proposals could be put and they would be listened to. This is impossible in the present climate, and it is not the A's but the B's who are responsible for that. If once that cycle were ended for good, I would come back into the discussion and I would put proposals that I believe would lead to an article move within weeks without the need for a multi-option poll or ArbCom involvement. Until then, however, I will take no further part in the discussion. I'm not interested in setting myself up to be shot down. P.S. I posted this a couple of hours ago. You needn't answer if you don't want to. Scolaire (talk) 20:26, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * LoL - Nail. Head. Hit. One of the things I learned is that, in actual fact, everybody is right.  The "other" side is frustrated because - How do you change things (via consensus, etc) if the *majority* disagree (regardless of (or leaving aside at least)) policy and weight of arguments...  feelings of injustice, oppression, etc...  --HighKing (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes it is a extra-ordinary claim to make, however i did read it somewhere in the past few months, i just wish i could remember where so i could post a link or reference to it. But if it was a serious proposal (which they did reject in the end) it does say a lot. Mabuska (talk) 14:30, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've had no luck finding it myself, and I seriously doubt that Ireland had a proposal in the 90s to change the name of the state to "Republic of Ireland", especially given the negotiations that were taking place leading up to the GFA. But stranger things have happened....  If you find it, please let me know.  --HighKing (talk) 19:46, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Alternatively:
 * Party A: We need to find a way to reach a consensus on how article names are to be changed. Here's a proposal!
 * Party B: But I don’t want any article names to be changed. And what’s more, the consensus is to keep the names as they are.
 * Party A: You’re being disruptive! You’re trying to wreck consensus to stop article names from being changed.
 * Party B: You're being disruptive! You're trying to impose your preferred title while accusing me (and the vast majority) of being unreasonable and intransigent!
 * Party A: Define 'majority'!
 * Party C: Wall of text.
 * Party X makes some inane and irrelevant comment.
 * Party Y says everybody should stop fighting and go home.
 * Party A: So anyway, how do we reach consensus to change article names? Here's a proposal!

And round and round it goes. Until someone introduces the argument that it doesn't matter if the title is right or wrong, so long as it's changed... Mabuska, I'd love if you could find that link too. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 20:51, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * LoL! Perhaps we should consider running a project-wide poll but not allow British or Irish voters :-)  Let the rest of the world decide... --HighKing (talk) 21:44, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The problem with that is that a certain editor will argue that anyone born before 1922 is British... (that they'd still be unable to contribute would be irrelevant to the editor in question). Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 21:57, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Gleann Gabhra


A tag has been placed on Gleann Gabhra, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia for multiple reasons. Please see the page to see the reasons. If the page has since been deleted, you can ask me the reasons by leaving a message on my user talk page.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mt king  (edits)  23:51, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Gleann Gabhra for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gleann Gabhra 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/Gleann Gabhra until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Mt king  (edits)  00:03, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Dispute Resolution
You may be interested in this. Peter jackson (talk) 11:10, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

David Arnold
Why do you take off David Arnold from the Greg Bahnsen site? Everyone at the church that Greg Bahnsen was pastor at knows that this information is true. It is not vandalism, it is the truth. David Arnold and Kathy Bahnsen are now married and live in Tennessee. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.38.22.138 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 26 November 2011‎ (UTC)
 * Look over the history of the article and you'll find that in the past, this was removed because it is unreferenced. Find a reference that meets policy requirements WP:V and it won't be removed.  --HighKing (talk) 21:02, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Irish bios infoboxes
Ya got me worried. What's with the city-county instead of city-country thing? GoodDay (talk) 02:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * This is an encyclopedia, the purpose of which is to provide easily accessible information for the reader. Including 'county' conveys double the information that just including 'country' does, especially when all but two of Ireland's presidents have been born within the state. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:05, 28 November 2011 (UTC)