User talk:Tangerines/Archive 3

Tibet again
When the template was added two days ago, no consensus was made on the talk page Have a nice day--219.79.120.208 02:16, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

It is you who comment: "all means discuss on the talk page". So tell me, when User:SwedishZeta add this POV template two days ago, have anyone ever discussed this great change? Have you?

I dont know what it is if its not double standards. --219.79.120.208 02:38, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm tired of the editing of the Tibet article aren't you. I think its about time we requested a partial locking of it ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦  "Expecting you" Contribs 09:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I've spoken to several admin -we'll wait to see what they suggest. You'll need to revert again - we appear to have lost the neat infobox agaaaaiinnn!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 17:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I haven't heard a thing yet unfortuntely. You'd think these people woudld have lives and find something better to do that keep adding it every day wouldn't you!!! i've asked admin but no reply yet ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦  "Expecting you" Contribs 16:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I've made an official request -ahould be approved in a few hours -you'd better revert again before it is locked ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 20:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I think a semi is OK - I have noted it will need to be permanent - asking them to look at the ridiculous history of the page. most of the problems arise from unregistered or new users. we should be able to discuss change with more established users -its one less thing to have to keep bothering about!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 20:37, 14 July 2007 (UTC).

I'm very surprised it was declined. Did he bother to check edits before July 2007? There are countless edits. Ah well you can't say I didn't try ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦  "Expecting you" Contribs 22:10, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Tibet are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. Please refrain from doing this in the future. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 02:35, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:81.155.103.36"

I have received your message above and looked at the page suggested. I don't know what you are trying to say, but if you are saying what I think you are saying, then there is nothing in Wiki to back up what I think you are trying to say. If you wish to be an editor and contribute, then please refrain from making up your own Wiki policies and rules and deleting other people's contribution in the discussion part of Wikipedia. And yes, you should read the bit about deletions. If you follow your own made up rules, then you should delete a very large chunk of your own (Tangerines) and Nat Krause's discussions in the discussion section of the article. 81.155.103.36 02:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Blocks
Hi, thanks for the message anyway. —Jeremy (talk) 00:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Protection in the Argentinian article
Why wasn't the article protected in the way it was until three weeks ago and as it was for agreement in the talk page for like a year. Aren't we protecting vandalism??. I just reverted the text to the previous one!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snowhite1985 (talk • contribs) 02:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Argentina
Thanks for trying to work this out. The demographics issue is a fight without end and without rewards. I've been trying to ignore it and I've thought of ways of stopping it in a definitive way, but the only way would be a full protection for an indefinite time, which I won't (and by policy, can't) apply. We'll see if this calms down; at least the semi-protection will stop anonymous and sockpuppet edits. If only we could have a serious discussion without idiots stepping in... —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 02:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Username
The best approach would be to follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names as the may be in a good position to address the matter. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 02:55, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The information that you posted on my talk page is fine. Just condense it a little and clarify your concerns. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 03:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

It is indeed pathetic. What sort of a person spoofs another user?? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 07:41, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi there
I have noticed you on Wikiproject:football and making edits to Argentine football articles. Could you help me get this deleted, he's definately never played professional football in Argentina and I dont think he's played in the UK at any notable level: Nick Gindre also I m not sure that Juan Manuel Buzzi and Daniel Hernán Falco meet notability either.

I could you nominate them for deletion if you feel they are non-notable, I got stick for not doing it properly last time. Kind Regards King of the North East 23:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * As a reward fot your helpful attitude I offer you this Barra-Bravas possibly the most comprehensive football hooligan site in world football, its in Spanish though which may or may not be a problem. Cheers.King of the North East 23:55, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello Tangerines
User:Gazh

I have replied to your message on my user page, regarding the page English people. Just incase you haven't noticed. Cheers. Gazh 13:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

90 Minutes for Mandela‎
Hello Tangerines, I didn't revert your edits, you must have made them while I was editing as there was an edit conflict when I saved my changes, which is why it looks like they were reverted...do you want to do what you have to do (I would but I am crap with references!) and then let me know when you have finished so this problam doesn't happen in the future? Cheers, GiantSnowman 17:45, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, I've finished editing for the forsseable future (today!), so I'll leave you to correct my references! Cheers, GiantSnowman 18:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

"Neighbors"/"neighbours"
Sorry, I forgot about using the British spelling when I made the article. I'll try doing that in my future edits. --DrBat 03:50, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Polish Speedway
Hi. See this. Best wishes, Radziński (t) 17:59, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Helmets and Memorials - this events isn't championships. National Qualification - every year rules was change, e.g. since 2006 National Qualification for World Individual Speedway Championship are join to Golden Helmet (Top riders from Golden Holment into SGP Qualification). I see, You use world.speedway.org (remember - this side is old). Sorry for my english :P Radziński (t) 10:25, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello. Yes, I mean Polish rider has won the U21 World Championship each year since 2003 (Hampel, Miśkowiak, Kasprzak and Ząbik in 2006). In Poland WC mean toilet too :D. But, when I wrote "WC" I'm thinking aboute World Championship (like EC = European, PC = Polish). I know - this is some strange. Radziński (t) 09:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

"Preston North End"
Well, I know nothing of Wikipedia's rules and regulations but this matter seems to have been easily resolved. Cheers. Wermhelo 16:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

luton town migs
cheers bruv! hope u stay up this year, i like 2 see teams in orange do wel! ;) Mattyspringltfc 03:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

tangerine, orange, wots the difference? i fink luton's the only team that calls it orange, wolves call it old gold... :D as for luton's chances next year, promotion son promotion! ;) Mattyspringltfc 03:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

fanx man, sorry bout that Mattyspringltfc 15:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey Up
Most of your edits on Argentine football have been good, we really need to sort something out for Argentine football, the coverage is really recentist, hardly any of the great players from before the 80s have articles. Also people keep adding and removing players from the current squads without using the players in and players out subheadings and adding seemingly made up players. The Argentine Primera is miles behind even League 2 in sunny England in terms of the number of players with articles and the quality of team articles. There has been discussion of forming Wikiproject:Argentine football, would you be interested in trying to get it set up? If so we can keep track of when squads have been updated, players needing articles, good online source material, Argentine players playing abroad, what needs to be done etc. Let me know if you're interested and we'll bring it up on Argentina-related regional notice board. Regards, King of the North East 22:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry to intrude. This is an important issue. I am all for creating Wikiproject:Argentine football. Let me know how can I help. Also want to thank both of you for your work with Argentine football. -- Alexf (t/c) 22:31, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Right,

I've started work on building the project page, (I've just assumed that I will get enough support) but I'm clueless about tagging and assessment (I just create and improve articles) we need something like this Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Football in England articles by quality statistics. I'm also going to need some help with designing a logo. You can see what I've done so far here: User:King of the North East/WPAF. I think it would be best if we get most of the components designed before we launch the project, what do you think? regards King of the North East 23:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Ive launched WikiProject Argentine football its not completely set up, it needs work on the assesment tools, I've asked for help on that. Feel free to add your signature and edit the page. King of the North East 19:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Argentine football
Hi, yeah we still need a nice logo and a userbox, I dont go in for them myself but some people do so we should have one. Feel free to have a go at designing them if you want. I have reorganised the teams in the list so the Primera contains next seasons teams by the way. I'm trying to work out who went where in the lower divisions at the moment. Regards,King of the North East 22:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Userbox looks good, this is coming on quite nicely. If you can think of anyone who would be interested in joining you could give them a shout on their talk page. Keep up the good work, King of the North East 22:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I posted your new userbox to my page. Nice job. Advertise it in the Arg Football project page for newcomers to use it if they wish. -- Alexf (t/c) 23:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

If you cared...
You would have done something already about the English people article. Taking the middle ground, not really, I think. Wiki-Ed is a committed partisan of TharkunColl. I am not being impartially restrained from blessing the article with NPOV. Either respond to my complaints, or your position is meaningless. TharkunColl has a POV violation preference for the article. You enforce his version. You are of no help. Lord Loxley 02:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

All right then. I was just trying to get your attention, perhaps to incite a more vigourous response. Cassiterides is already a feature of Wikipedia, wikilinked where necessary. Simply incorporating it into the article, by no means should confound the reader. I however, find the term "Romano-Briton" to be simplistic and not explanatory. Of course, the section on the Britannic heritage of the English people should be expanded. I am pleased that one of the new editors to the article has finally understood this. Beforehand, the article just bloviated on the Saxon nature of the English. I know by heart that I am more than Wessex, even if my recent ancestors are from Somerset, Dorset and Devon. I am the least biased person with regards to this, putting aside my family because of the Thomas Hardy stereotypes. I don't want to stimulate my ego by taking advantage of what is taken for granted about Englishmen. Lord Loxley 21:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I have no problem with your statement about the section title. I'm merely putting emphasis on the fact that it must be left in the section, if not the title. The old title was similarly odd. Lord Loxley 22:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

If you want to save the skewed article, by all means do so. I have no interest keeping Wikipedia free from self-aggrandizing, Victorian bigots. My tolerance does not extend to the intolerant throwbacks. Lord Loxley 23:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, Wiki-Ed has continued flaming and I have replied once again. It is so easy to assess the wrong of him and TharkunColl. It is impossible for them to repent. That is why this is an impasse. Lord Loxley 16:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

assessment
Hi,

Nice to see you doing some tags, but I think we need to get the importance issues sorted.

I would say a player like Leonardo Pisculichi who has no major titles must be low.

I would say something like


 * 1 league title or fewer as player or manager = Low


 * 2+ league titles, top level international title (Copa Lib, Copa America World Cup) =Mid


 * 10+ titles or remarkable achievement (World Cup winning goal, world cup winning manager, club record top scorer or highest appearences for massive club like Boca, River Independiente) = High

We should try to avoid recentism so we dont end up like the English project Ruud van Nistelroij ,John Terry, Frank Lampard and Stevie G are High, Dixie Dean (mega goalscorer) is mid, Bobby Moore (England's only World Cup winning captain) is mid and Walter Winterbottom isnt even tagged.

What do you think?King of the North East 00:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you agree, but feel free to argue your case if you ever disagree mate. I think there are very few players with wikipedia articles in english that havnt played at the top level. i think we could always tag average primera players as low until the day that there are multiple articles on players in the lower league. At least then we can determine which articles are more deserving of attention as it is now.King of the North East 00:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Maybe 1 lge title = mid would be fairer. so we could have


 * 1 Low = Undecorated players
 * 2 Mid = Decorated players, international footballers, league topscorer, top 10 appearances for top level club, that kind of thing
 * 3 High = High acheiver as before


 * Agree or no?King of the North East 00:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Sorry
Sorry about deleting the Length on The Religion in the UK page. I really like the UK aswell, I am half Spanish half English living in Spain (if you care) (Nadal25 20:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC))

English Democrats
I'll be happy to let you know where the information is aroung the internet - try using Google !

Regards, Steve Uncles —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.2.97.151 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 2 August 2007

Citation/References
English Democrats Site - Hmmm, how hard are you trying to find Citations around the Web ?

If you try Google, you will find all the details on the English Democrats site are true.

Regards

Steven Uncles National Council Member English Democrats

Steven.Uncles@EngDem.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.2.97.151 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 2 August 2007

I Vow to Thee my Country
Have you read what I edited out? "More of a rallying call in a country's hour of need than the "death of a country" as suggested above IMHO." <-- That's not even encyclopaedic, never mind valid. Furthermore the sentence "The verse deals with the death of a certain "country" (WWI) mentioned in the first verse" is patently false. I'll give you the opportunity to come up with a better revision of the article before I edit it again. Regards, FusionWarrior 18:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Hooliganism
I didn't mean to sound like I was giving you a hard time. Just trying to pick a short descriptive reason why I was changing the tag. I figured you had just forgotten to remove it. No worries, I'm not upset or anything. Markkawika 23:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Ireland
Have you ever visited Ireland? If you have, you might want to put that in your Countries visited  section. --Nick4404 00:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Yid Army
Arguably the term Yid Army is so much more closely identified with Spurs fans than with its real 'firm' (who afaik go by another name) that the comparison with real 'firm' names like ICF/Bushwackers is being stretched a bit far. (Ted) 86.143.157.244 16:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

The Historic Counties edits you've made and reinstated after their reversion
I've reverted these. The source you gave did not verify that numerous instances of moved signs had taken part, merely that there was an intention to move some signs in County Durham. Not the same thing at all! If there are "numerous references" on the countrywatch site, you should include one which exactly verifies the claim you are making. If you cannot find one or more that do so, then the supposed "fact" should not be added. DDStretch   (talk)  17:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I got mixed up with the websites. However, rather than use weasel words, it is better to use the exact figures and make the claims be accurate. I hope I have now made the appropriate changes. I have made the changes regarding the claim about 80, which is not backed up by the cited source.  DDStretch    (talk)  17:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I typed in an answer and didn't see your later edits to the message. The claims you seemed to be making were encapsulated in the reversions you thought should be made. That you thought they needed reinserting suggested to me that you accepted them. Sorry if that was a misunderstanding.  DDStretch    (talk)  17:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your messages. I do want to apologise and withdraw any statements I made about you using weasel words, and making substantive claims in that article, rather than merely trying to sort it out. I acted rather hastily, and so I need to apologise. My only explanation is that I have had a number of wrangles with some Countrywatch advocates who distort facts and edit in a non NPOV way. I have been away for a while, and came back to see the recent edits and jumpedf to a conclusion I now see is wrong. Once again, my apologies.  DDStretch    (talk)  21:22, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Joe Smith
I was considering making an article on his career at Blackpool, since he is the club's longest-serving manager, with details on each season such as the team's league and cup performances, as well as his signings and sales. Reckon it would pass notability? - Dudesleeper · Talk 12:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


 * But would you just go into detail on his years at Blackpool in his current article, or make another article entitled, for example, Joe Smith (the Blackpool years)? I wouldn't want his article to become too Blackpool-centric, you see. - Dudesleeper · Talk 17:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Postal Counties
Yes, I share (a little) concern with Tony Bennett's contributions - I am a little concerned that he may overlook the "point" of Wikipedia itself and could use it as a soapbox. But let's assume good faith and see what happens.

With regards to Postal Counties (as a rather shamed former Royal Mail Operational Manager), they were actually abolished as part of the policy review of 1995/1996. These "previous" fixed counties used are now known within the business as the "former postal counties". People who are affectionate of using the historic county boundaries in a geographic frame of reference (though they are more often refering to the Administrative counties of England but aren't aware of it), often try to cite that "many/some people/organisations still use them on their "official address" (though not only is it not their official address, it's never quantified, and thus a breach of WP:RS). However what we should consider is that Saddleworth's postal county is Lancashire (and post town of OLDHAM), whilst Liverpool's is Merseyside, Croxton Kerrial's is Lincolnshire and Stokesley's is Cleveland (!) etc etc; the postal counties were full of descrepencies, and didn't align to any county system other than their own, and I'm very much opposed to them (dare I even say philosophically opposed) being used to assert the greater or lesser cultural status of former/current/traditional/vice/ceremonial/administrative/registration/shire/metropolitan counties in articles as a means of "point scoring", flexible addressing or no flexible addressing. Hope you share my view on this. Jza84 00:29, 11 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Quite. I hold a personal opinion about this man, and don't want it to affect how I treat him as a contributor let's just say! He is new to Wikipedia and may need some time to adjust - and afterall, we shouldn't bite the newcomers!


 * I should imagine that this gentleman, as a busy politician, won't (or at least shouldn't) have a great deal of time to contribute to the project, and thus if he becomes a distruptive editor, the effects will be minimal. Also, as a high-profile (or semi-high-profile) person, I think he'd be wise enough not to excert any abusive or distruptive contributions. Let's see what happens - I think between us we'll be okay here.


 * On another note, I've trying to promote the UK Geography WikiProject. As you seem take an interest in this subject, would you consider being a participant (it's in danger of being closed in my view). Jza84 00:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Award

 * Looking through some of your work during the last week or so, I think you have been very, very patient with Tony Bennett, and hereby award you...

Blackpool International Airport
When i added Blackpool Pleasure beach to the list of stations directly avalable from Squires Gate Station, i was intending for it to be of help to tourists ariving in Blackpool via the Airport. However, it is probably simpler that only destinations at the end of each line are shown. I assume your good faith in deleting 'Blackpool PB station'. However, Preston station is the southbound end of the branch line, trains then carry on along the East Lancashire Line to Colne--Olster99 10:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Bispham High School Arts College
Is it a B or a start? I think I have assigned B. Could you add a bit more to justify it. WELL done to all Victuallers 14:17, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Blackout Ripper Article
Thanks much for fleshing out my Blackout Ripper stub; I really appreciate it! The Sanity Inspector 17:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Seasiders kit question
Can you remember which season in the '90s we had dark blue and light blue stripes as our away strip? I know it was after 1991-92. - Dudesleeper · Talk 13:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Historic counties of England
Hello there. I've added some information in the above article as well as raising two issues on its discussion page. Since you recently did a lot of editing to the article, I'd be happy if you could cast your eye over them and see whether it first in with rest. The issue is an important one regarding the northern border of Cheshire at the time of Domesday Book. There may be a bit more to add from the VCH (Victoria History of the County of Cheshire) which might explain a bit more why the misunderstanding came about (apparently, a possible matter of economy in binding the pages together in the Domesday Book added to the idea that Cheshire owned part of south Lancashire at the time.) I think the map may have influenced things, as there would be a reluctance to have bits of England at the time which were not clearly in any county, but that last bit is just a supposition on my part, and should not be part of any encyclopedia entry. DDStretch   (talk)  15:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Sethadamwinston
Thanks for moving my contribution. I'm still learning the ropes; but I don't know how I managed to put the templates on the user page instead of tha talk page. B1atv 16:39, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Geoff Horsfield
You did some good cleanup on Geoff Horsfield, but I'm confused as to why you have added all those redundant parameters to the citations. None of the articles in question have a named author or co-author, 'pages' is not relevant for a web-based report, 'work' isn't really required (you could have work=BBC Sport and publisher=BBC put this doesn't really add anything), and while you could have language=English, this would seem unnecessary in an article about an English player who has only ever played in England, referenced by articles all in English. Is it a standard in Wikipedia to have all parameters included, even if they are to remain blank? Just curious. Cheers. --Jameboy 10:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Your edit to the Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama article
See my edit summary. Dalai Lamas are not numbered by Roman numerals. "Dalai Lama XIV" is gibberish. --Jiang 00:29, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Assume good faith? See the talk page and discuss there.--Jiang 00:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:BHSAClogo.jpg
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:BHSAClogo.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 17:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Tibetan towns and villages
HI I need to know who to speak to about this. I am currently as you know adding all the towns and villages in Tibet. I want to create a standard infobox Tibetan settlement for all the towns and villages such as Infobox Tibetan settlement. Is there anyway we can have something like this: Domartang but with parameters to include the Tibetan/Chinese language section like on Deleg at the top so it all goes neatly in one box for settlements? PLease respond on this as soon as you can as I feel it very important thanks  ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦       "Talk"? 13:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC) Something like this:

Animal Liberation Front
No problem on small correction. I had to read it a few times, then go back and look at other changes to figure out if it was intentional vandalism or just a mistake. Happens all the time!Bob98133 02:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

RE: User name
Yeah, that's fine. It's all good. The user didn't catch on to the fact that I added an internal link that would explain what 'Bentonia School' is anyway. Bentonia School 06:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

tag location
Hi, I thought that only section tags go into sections while the article tags go to the top of the page so they could serve it's purpose. Is there a Wikipedia guideline that can substantiate your revert? Avala 19:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the misunderstanding. I usually forget about the edit summary but will think about it in the future. And about the tag, someone should verify if it is really needed as it was placed in February 2007, though article of that size definitely needs more than 76 references. Avala 20:46, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Issues with the Alice Domon article
Added the reference tags... I was translating perhaps more literally than I should have been from a well-written article Spanish version of the same article. Your general clean-up edits were a definite improvement. However, as a new user, I remain more or less unclear on Wikipedia policy regarding foreign names and quotes... in what situation should I quote/name and then put the English translation in parenthesis, or just translate the whole formal title? For example, the Wiki articles on Ley de Punto Final and Ley de Obedencia Debida retain their Spanish titles as their formal names, which is why I left them in Spanish in the article. Desaparecidos, for example, is a term with specific cultural context that (at least to me) seems valid to remain in Spanish (although qualified with an explanation). OCoraçãodeNOLA 23:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Myerscough College
Many thanks for your work on this, it looks much more useful. I'll try and track down the missing citations! Poppy 15:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to vote
You as someone who participated in the editing of English people article might be interested in taking part in this discussion. Feel free to state your opinion. M.V.E.i. 16:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

"-shire" counties
I changed the county mentioned as an example of a newly-created unit because the shires of "English Mercia" (Hertfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire, Gloucestershire, Warwickshire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Staffordshire, Shropshire and Cheshire) are better examples of this than those of "Danish Mercia" (Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Huntingdonshire, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire and the odd one out, Rutland). The latter group had a clear direct precedent in the territories of the burhs which formed the basis of Danish organisation in the areas of Mercia under their control (the burh of Stamford corresponding to Rutland). The precise extent of each of these individual territories is unknown, so it is not clear how far the subsequent shire organisation adapted the Danish boundaries, but they were based on the same towns and therefore at least the general outline of that organisation was clearly there beforehand. Zburh 01:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Zburh
Hi, you left a message for this user on their user page - it really should have been on his talk page. Just wanted to let you know. &mdash; Timotab Timothy (not Timdagnabbit!) 02:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe I came across wrong. I didn't mean to imply you didn't know where it should have been, I was letting you know as I thought you might not have realised your mistake :) &mdash; Timotab Timothy (not Timdagnabbit!) 02:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Chris Kutler
I see you have undone all the work I did last week. I don't think you have the right to do this. What is the point of me adding all the information on my site to Wikipedia, when a simple link will suffice.

I am pretty angry that you suggest that I am using link spam. Can you tell me where else you can get a list of all sites in your area? My database is a valuable resource which can be used without payment and by taking out links to my site you are depriving others of this resource.

Why didn't you remove the links to other sites which list monuments. Is it because my site has a commercial aspect to it and was funded privately. If this is to, then this amounts to censorship with you as the sole judge and jury. If you bothered to look at my site you would see that there is lots and lots of information which is freely available. What annoys me the most is that I have paid a lot of money for collecting the information.

Finally, the database is used all over the world by academics and Universities which suggests its importance.

If you go around doing this kind of thing to other people's sites then why don't you let them contact you by email? My personal view is that YOU are vandalising the pages by removing stuff you think is spam. I've contacted Wikipedia with my concerns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Kutler (talk • contribs) 12:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Reply to Tangerines Reply
I think you need to differentiate between promoting one's site soley for personal profit and promoting one's own site to enhance the information held in Wikipedia. The former is the reason why non of us like spam, the latter is the reason for adding links.

I recently wrote a paper on GIS and the internet. The subsequent seminar I gave to academics from all over the world was very well received. Are you saying that I shouldn't include a reference to my paper in the Wikipedia GIS-related pages because it is my own paper - even though my work was one of the first projects of its kind?!?

I think we need to rethink the policy on review. You also removed the link from the Wikipedia page on Placenames. My website contains one of the largest placenames databases freely available on the internet and is searchable by placename element. Results in the list link to maps and aerial photos of the places. I cannot find another 'placename' site with such rich functionality. Yet, you removed this link for no other reason than you THOUGHT it was spam. I am pretty sure that you didn't even check the link, which is why I am angry and why I have suggested that you are vandalising certain Wikipedia pages.

The question now, is are you going to remove the links if I put them back in again. If you are, then it would be better if you can give sound reasons for doing so. Yes, I did see that you had notified me on my Talk page, however, you didn't give sound reasons for removing all the links en masse. Chris Kutler 13:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Kutler (talk • contribs) 13:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I take your points and bearing this in mind can I ask why you have not removed the link at the bottom of the Monuments wikipage to Website of Monuments and Sculptures in UK. In my view it a similar site. It is clear to me that you have got it into your head that I am a spammer and I am getting quite annoyed with your reasons for excluding my links. Have you any speficic archaeological training which enables you to decide which links are relevant? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Kutler (talk • contribs) 16:51, 1 October 2007

Help fix this problem
Hello! I hope you are feeling fine. I would like you to view this comment which I made. I hope you can fix this problem which I cannot seem to comprehend. Thanks! -- S iva1979 Talk to me 18:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Hooliganism
I see that you are involved in editing the hooliganism pages. I am going either to expand section on Polish hools or start a new article. Anyway, I know a lot about this phenomenon, but major problem is lack of English sources. What would you suggest? Greetings Tymek 18:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I do appreciate your help, good job. I will try to find sources and asap I will expand the article on Polish hools. I have seen a lot of this stuff with my own eyes, and frankly speaking, I could write an article without checking any sources. BTW Green Street Hooligans is a good movie, but Polish lads had a lot of fun watching it as some situations are totally unrealistic. Greetings Tymek 19:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Will you do me a favor and add those groups, with references? I am still having problems with these technical things. Greetings Tymek 17:18, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * No problemo. Will you please look at Football Hooliganism in Poland? Tymek 17:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, this article still needs a lot of work, I would like to add more info on major disturbances, including lower divisions. Also, I will add more info on alliances between firms. BTW if you like this stuff, you should check some flags of Polish fans, a lot of them are great Tymek 18:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It is me again. I have noticed that you are using some of the sources provided by me. However, don't be angry if I correct some info, as many journalists and the so-called experts have no idea about Polish scene, and they often mess facts. Greetings.

BTW here you can check movies of Polish ultras, here  - flags of Polish firms, browse all pages as this is the forum. Enjoy Tymek 00:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, sorry Tymek 01:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Football Hooliganism
Hey, I have edited the football hooliganism page in order to aware others of the growing small crisis of hooliganism in Australia. While I am new here, this can be verified from sources of the www.gloryshed.com.au/, abc.com.au and perthglory.com.au via the a-league website. -thanks Michaeljohnblack —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaeljohnblack (talk • contribs) 04:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

WPMT Roll Call and COTM
 WPMT Roll Call and Collaboration of the Month! You're receiving this message because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Musical Theatre. Please post at the talk page to let us know if you're still with the project. Feel free to post on the talk page about what musical theatre-related work you're doing or to weigh in on the current discussions on the talk page.

Nominations for our Collaboration of the Month are currently being accepted. What should we focus on for the month of November? Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks much, folks! Happy editing! &mdash;  Music  Maker  5376  04:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Lancashire categorisation
Please note there is usually no need to add an article to a category if is already in a subcategory of that category. For example, few articles should be directly within Category:Geography of Lancashire as they ought to be in one of its subcategories instead. For places in the Fylde, it is sufficient to do the following: --Dr Greg 11:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * places in Blackpool: put in a subcategory of Category:Blackpool
 * places in Fylde Borough: put in Category:Fylde (borough)
 * places in Wyre Borough that are also on the Fylde: put in Category:The Fylde and Category:Wyre
 * places in Preston District that are also on the Fylde: put in Category:The Fylde and a subcategory of Category:Preston
 * places in Lancaster District that are also on the Fylde: put in Category:The Fylde and a subcategory of Category:Lancaster

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bmech.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bmech.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cep logo.GIF
Thanks for uploading Image:Cep logo.GIF. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 13:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:BHSAClogo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:BHSAClogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:28, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Tibet
Watch 3RR please. Don't worry, I'll take care of the matter at hand. Raymond Arritt (talk) 18:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Torcida Split
hello, i just referenced the article with a reliable source, the same one that published whole this neonazism stuff. i can only assure you that whole this mess is only part of election campaigns because elections are approaching and will be held in just few weeks time. cheers, man! :) West Brom 4ever (talk) 15:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)