User talk:Mo ainm/Archives/2010/October

Keith Law (singer and songwiriter) new article
Hello please I would know why is this page not accepted? Ladyrhiannon78 (talk) 11:08, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It needs a bit of work as MySpace is not a reliable source please add additional sources if you can find any. Mo ainm  ~Talk  14:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC)


 * In response to your query,
 * Allmusic has limited info on Velvet Fogg here.
 * There are lots of discussions re Velvet Fogg and The Williamsons here.
 * Possibly helpful fansite here.
 * Seems to be a lot of Velvet Fogg info here
 * Sorry I can't help more but I'm focusing on the bands I'm really interested in. Good luck. Iangurteen (talk) 09:45, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello... Fergal Crawley
I already have - Tayne Campbell is a 12 year old brat who enjoys poking his stick at a 38 y/o business ban when he got banned off a forum he runs. The article is a mockery, you'd have to be blind not to notice this. Keeping the page up is only helping him succeed in being a little cock, I know not of a better way to word it. Along with that, there are no references on the article and with due respect to Fergal who I happen to know, he is hardly deserving of or well known enough for a Wikipedia page. It really needs deleting now to be honest. I don't abuse Wikipedia like some do and while I don't understand fully how everything works and I don't know the proper way of doing things, but I know that this is definitely not a useful contribution to the site. For that reason the offending content should be removed and we should wait for an administrator to delete the article in due course. Donkey100 (talk) 16:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The article was re created and deleted after I mentioned it at WP:ANI also the editor who created has received an indef block and the article was given a little salt Mo ainm  ~Talk  13:22, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Peacock Terms
Please I removed some peacock terms, could you see if now is it ok? Thanks, Ladyrhiannon78 (talk) 15:13, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Flagging of Thomas Ross Holmes
Hi,

I added the page Thomas Ross Holmes and have been in discussion with the administrator 'Jimfbleak' about wikifying it. I have resubmitted it according to his guidelines and notified him on his talk page, but now the article has been flagged for speedy deletion by yourself. In his guidelines, Jim did not mention having to further qualify the notability of the subject, so I have not included that in the edit. Please could you clarify with him whether this page meets the wikipedia standards, so I can follow one direction with any further edits required

Thanks and regards

Bensomersethow (talk) 09:20, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Have a read of our general notability guidelines and more specific guidelines on people.  Mo ainm  ~Talk  09:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey
Actually I just wanted to ask that on the page :Algorithms for calculating variance is the pseudocode that is given for calculating variance correct?

variance = E(X**2) - (E(X))**2 Computational formula for the variance

Should'nt it be mean*mean as opposed to Sum * mean?

Thanks...

```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nk28 (talk • contribs) 06:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that it is sum*mean but maybe you could raise it on the talk page. So I have copied this post over. Mo ainm ~Talk  17:15, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi
Thanks ever so much for your welcome on my page and your comments. I'd really like to have a mentor if you can recommend one? Someone who has no connection to Ireland and who can give me a neutral point of view as an observer reading an article. I'd be very grateful.SonofSetanta (talk) 14:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * In all honesty the majority of editors here edit with a NPOV, of course we have some that don't, and having said that it is a subject area that a lot of editors give a wide bearth to so unfortunately I couldn't recommend anyone and not sure why you would want one. Wikipedia is a collaboration process were you work with everyone so just get stuck in and i'm certain if you are doing anything "wrong" you will be told. Mo ainm  ~Talk

I see what you mean. Ok, I'll just plod away. I suppose I got kind of apprehensive when reading the archives of that page I was working on. I don't want to get dragged in scary stuff like that.SonofSetanta (talk) 16:30, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank'ee
I try to be moderate in my language on these topics, both because I am a Quaker and because it's the best way of advancing the project. I still don't know what honked the guy off, unless he thinks Catholic UDR members weren't maltreated by paramilitary sympathisers (despite all the testimony to the contrary). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:53, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Also don't know who he is referring to with his a chap said it wasn't a reliable source as I am the only editor he has interacted with on the article and I have never made such a claim, might be getting confused with something else. Mo ainm  ~Talk  17:56, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Lukas Lidakevičius
Not even one minute after creation? Come on, you cannot be doing that. I mean, that's too fast to be PRODding like that, not to mention you're likely scaring away newcomers by doing that. Try tagging first (i.e. with BLP unsourced), wait a bit, and then if no improvements come, then tag for BLP PROD. But don't do that less than a minute after the article's creation. The least you can do is give the creator the benefit of the doubt that a source might be coming. –MuZemike 18:36, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * ...and the same applies above for Aurimas Vilkaitis, which you also tagged for deletion. –MuZemike 18:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah it notifies the editor that we no longer allow unsourced BLP's here. I didn't speedy the article and the creator can remove as soon as he adds sources, I think it is important to let editors know about sourcing and the blpprod is a good way of doing it. Mo ainm  ~Talk  18:41, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

NI article
I had to stifle an (off topic) snigger at the suggestion that the Irish language is given undue weight anywhere over the Ulster-Scots "language". WikiuserNI (talk) 16:38, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I know does make you laugh sure there must be 4 speakers of that language now ;) Mo ainm  ~Talk  17:08, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
The removal of one image on the UDR article was a slight oversight on my part, good job sorting it. 2 lines of K 303  12:10, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

SonofSetanta/Ulster Defense Regiment
In response to your most recent comment on Talk:Ulster Defense Regiment, actually, all SoS knew was that some big template was slapped onto his/her talk page. This problem could have been avoided if you and the other editors had tried to explain more carefully and nicely all those acronyms you were throwing around. WP:BITE strongly recommends that we don't bite the newcomers--this is even more true on highly contentious areas than in regular editing. Please try to exercise more care and be more explanatory in the future. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Never mind, strike all that. I see now that SoS does not appear to be a new user. I believe y'all could have saved yourselves trouble by filing an SPI earlier, or bringing the editor to the attention of an admin, that way you wouldn't have to spend time reverting, and having your motives questioned by outsiders like myself. In any event, I apologize for questioning your actions. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:12, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't think that this user was a sock but I had a feeling they weren't as new as they kept saying they were. I have tried to guide this user but I don't think I was saying what he wanted to hear, I know you have struck the comment about the template I put on his page my reasoning for using that was that it describes the sanctions a hell of a lot better than I could have. Mo ainm  ~Talk  13:29, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

BISE stuff
I'm pulling back from Bjmullan's & Triton Rocker's dispute. You're correct, trying to fix these situations, can cause more harm (and drama). GoodDay (talk) 15:04, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Lies
Please try not to characterize other editors' statements as "lies" -- there's usually a better way to state it, such as "That statement is not supported by the edit history", which doesn't assume motivation in the same way that "lying" does. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:27, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade, I had used mistruth earlier but maybe the editor didn't understand that because they repeated the same again. Mo ainm  ~Talk  17:41, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * And "crap" is right out. Try "inaccuracies". This is the fast track to a block, Mo... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:50, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I wont be commenting again only feeding him. Mo ainm  ~Talk  17:54, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Not cool, Mo. Are you bucking for a disruption block here? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:06, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Factocop is making test edits in mainspace and not reverting them. For example I reverted two 11 minutes after they were made, and they were acknowledged as such on the talk page. Why not address the person causing the problems, not those dealing with it? O Fenian (talk) 17:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, caught up now. Sorry. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:10, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * OK no problem, thank you. O Fenian (talk) 17:11, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Replied on my talk
K. the Surveyor (talk) 20:15, 30 October 2010 (UTC)