User talk:Johnhousefriday

Proposed merge
Dear John, about your proposal to merge Collier Baronets and Sir George Collier, 1st Baronet. I appreciate your reasoning, but it's often the case that baronetcies and titles are notable and have their own articles, even when their only holder has an article. (examples we have include: Frederick Abel - Abel Baronets, Milne Barbour - Barbour Baronets, J. M. Barrie - Barrie Baronets, Henry Cautley, 1st Baron Cautley - Baron Cautley, Francis Channing, 1st Baron Channing of Wellingborough - Baron Channing of Wellingborough, Bertram Falle, 1st Baron Portsea - Baron Portsea, to name just a few). With this in mind, do you still want to push for the merger, or would you have any objection to removing the proposal? Benea (talk) 01:21, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

The Prairie du Chien School District
You may want to read the Political subdivisions of Wisconsin article. The Wisconsin school districts are separate from the municipalities in Wisconsin and therefore are notable.I also notice you suggested a merger of the Decorah Community School District with the Decorah, Iowa article. This would be the same thing in Iowa.I therefore would oppose the mergers of the articles.Thank you-RFD (talk) 18:03, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I know what you mean, but the point is that the article is tiny and the information would be much better merged into the article on the area the schools serve. If you wanted to provide interesting information about the education provided by the school district, or perhaps a section on each of the schools, this would make such an independent article worthwhile. The exact same applies to the Decorah one, which is even smaller. Johnhousefriday (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Schloss Vaduz
Hi, I have removed the size of the images in the gallery on the article above. While big images are better viewable of course, they on the other side sometimes sprawl over a monitor's edge depending on the resolution of their viewers' browsers or pcs. If one doesn't add a size to the images in a gallery, they should adapt automatically to the respective settings. By the way anybody who wishes to watch the images more closely, can they open also in a new tab. Best wishes Phoe   talk   23:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Date format
Hi, me again :-) Please remember that we don't use 1st, 2nd, 3rd and so on in date formats or  (see also Date). Regards  Phoe   talk   23:35, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Succession box
Erm ... sorry ... another information: succession boxes are to be placed below the references or external links section and above the categories (see also Layout). If you have questions regarding the format, style or layout of articles, please feel free to ask me. Phoe  talk   13:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Lion and Unicorn Staircase
I have nominated Lion and Unicorn Staircase, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Lion and Unicorn Staircase. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:23, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Jonathan Mance, Baron Mance
Just a quick "thanks!" for this - it's rare to see an article about a living judge so nicely referenced and formatted. Ironholds (talk) 13:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And also for this. I have an article I'm working on that's potentially a Featured Article and involves Scots law; would you be interested in a collaboration? Ironholds (talk) 21:25, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

New disambig page
Hello, I noticed you recently moved Neil Walker to Neil Walker (swimmer) and then created a disambiguation page at the unqualified title. I hope you have reviewed Disambiguation, and particularly the section "Links to disambiguated topics" -- as it states there, "A code of honor for creating disambiguation pages is to fix all resulting mis-directed links. Before moving an article to a qualified name (in order to create a disambiguation page at the base name), click on What links here to find all of the incoming links. Repair all of those incoming links to use the new article name." Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think this paragraph could have been more nicely put. It helps to be nice to people. Johnhousefriday (talk) 23:32, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Your edits to Glasgow University RFC
I have removed your paragraph from this article because it is not acceptable for several reasons. Firstly, it is only of temporary interest, and secondly the phrase "like most rugby clubs" is an opinion, not a fact. Or more precisely a stereotype. It doesn't belong on an encyclopedia.

Please add encyclopedic material, e.g. the older history of the club, or famous players of the past, not this kind of tabloid sensationalism.--MacRusgail (talk) 16:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Jonathan Mance, Baron Mance
Hey. I appreciate your constructive red-editing. Aside from minor WP:MOS differences, the only quibble I would have is whether information like "His recreations include tennis, languages, and music" are really encyclopaedic in nature. I mean, for Who's Who, sure, and that is a valid reference, but to include as part of a bio? Anyway sorry to keep dragging you back to this article. P.S. I added Category:Knights Bachelor, which somehow got deleted. Yours, Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 22:12, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

David Maxwell Walker
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: David Maxwell Walker. Our verifiability policy requires that all content be cited to a reliable source. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Stair Society
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Stair Society, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.stairsociety.org. 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. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

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 (talk) 23:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

The Commando Memorial
I've reversed your move because WP:THE actually allows the definite article in this case - The Commando Memorial is actually the name of the work, and WP:THE also allows it so as to avoid confusion with the generic form which could refer to several potential articles. MickMacNee (talk) 12:38, 8 April 2010 (UTC)


 * You are correct that WP:THE permits use of the definite article when referring to "Titles of works and publications", however this is not a work or publication. While it is possible to see this subject as a work of art, its primary function is as a monument, i.e. it is an object, not a work of art. An article called The Commando Memorial would be more likely to be a painting of such a memorial, or a novel centered on it. Furthermore, to suggest that use of the definite article serves to distinguish this article from others does not stand. If there were a disambiguation issue arising with other articles about commando memorials - of which there is none - then this article being called The Commando Memorial would in fact denegrate the status of the other memorials, suggesting that this is the only or definitive memorial. Such an issue could be resolved simply by renaming this article as Commando Memorial (Spean Bridge). Do you not agree? Johnhousefriday (talk) 13:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)


 * It is a work, scupltures are works, and this was its official title. As nobody has painted it, or written a whole book about it, under that name, this splitting of hairs would appear to be a moot point. The guideline doesn't have to explicitly include sculptures for that common sense interpretation to stand. It is also valid under the General Usage section of WP:THE - this sculpture is the clear WP:PRIMARY use of the term 'The Commando Memorial'. And because it is the clear primary usage, it is also patently not a denigration to other monuments to have it at that title, and have all others, if they exist, filed under a generic disambiguation page at Commando Memorial. That would require a single hatnote. In my research, there are no others with the exact title, they all have qualifiers in their official and even common usage names, and those variations are likely due to this particular monument having been built first, and being the most widely known one. Moving this to just Commando Memorial, or worse, appending uneccessary disambiguators, will be detrimental. If you disagree still, I would ask you to copy this whole discussion to the article talk page, and formally request a third opinion, as I cannot really say anything further without getting into the realms of repetition. MickMacNee (talk) 15:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * fyi, I've replied over there now you;ve moved it, so I'll be removing this page from my watchlist. MickMacNee (talk) 23:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Senior Judiciary (Vacancies and Incapacity) (Scotland) Act 2006
Hi.

If you have a problem with an edit I have made, please let me know on my talk page rather than attempting to hold a conversation through edit summaries. In answer to your implication that I am just chopping information from the article without making improvements I would like to list the following points: As I am not familiar with the text or background of the Act I was not able to rewrite the paragraph. I attempted to identify a suitable third party source to support the text (see WP:Proveit), but was not able to do so before you made your edit. Rather than commenting on the actions of other editors (which may be mistaken for incivility) you may wish to consider the possible motivations of the other editor before hand. One of the problems with communicating by edit summary is that you can't revert or rephrase yourself if you later realise your statement was a little harsh or could have been interpreted the wrong way.
 * 1) My first edit added dates and correct status to the infobox, fixed date formats, updated the lead, fixed section headers and rephrased a sentence. I also added a tone tag as one section read like a piece of legislation but I was not familiar enough with the source material to attempt a rewrite myself.
 * 2) My second edit restored the removed tone tag and clarified the reasoning.
 * 3) I then checked the Explanatory Notes for the Act and identified a copyright violation. My third edit was to immediately remove the inappropriate text as should happen in all cases of copyright violations.

I would like to finish by saying your edit is well written and a definite improvement to what was there before.

Happy editing. Road Wizard (talk) 22:13, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Justice of the Supreme Court
I like the look of your userpage article on the Justices. It looks well developed. Any plans to make it a real article on Wikipedia? -- The Taerkasten ( talk ) 13:59, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I'd kind of forgotten about it but have updated it now and think it would be good as an article. Fancy taking another look and seeing what you think? Also, there is already a page at that name but as a redirect; how do you move it? Johnhousefriday (talk) 19:36, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll take another look at it. Plus it doesn't need to be moved, just remove the redirect and add the information there. Then we'll have to start linking articles, including the individual Justices pages to there.-- The Taerkasten ( talk ) 19:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Wow, a great start. I'm really impressed! I think its ready for inclusion into Wikipedia -- The Taerkasten ( talk ) 19:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Have moved it. Thanks for your help! Johnhousefriday (talk) 20:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. I was going to create an article about the Justices myself, but it looks like you beat me to it! Would you mind taking a look at the Deputy President article, see if it's OK? -- The Taerkasten ( talk ) 10:40, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Just to let you know, Lord Saville has retired from the Supreme Court per, and his profile no longer appears on the SC website.-- The Taerkasten ( talk ) 16:42, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Johnhousefriday! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created  is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 04:22, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) David Maxwell Walker -
 * Second this on Ann Power; it's pretty well referenced (and, may I say how nice it is to see people writing articles on living judges?) but the "Personal life" and most of the "European Court of Human Rights" sections are unreferenced. Would you mind fixing these issues? Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 02:16, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:
 * This permission does not give you any special status or authority
 * Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
 * You may wish to display the Autopatrolled top icon and/or the User wikipedia/autopatrolled userbox on your user page
 * If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
 * If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 21:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: proposed merge of Edinburgh College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine
Hi! Re your proposed merge of the above page, I've started a discussion here - you may wish to join. Thanks! --Amkilpatrick (talk) 08:49, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox professorship
Template:Infobox professorship has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. eh bien mon prince (talk) 18:31, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Brodies LLP.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:Brodies LLP.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:47, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Maclay Murray &#38; Spens (logo).jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Maclay Murray &. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:03, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Burness Paull.png
Thanks for uploading File:Burness Paull.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:GUTories.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:GUTories.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:27, 23 July 2020 (UTC)