User talk:TheOldJacobite/Archive 1 Dec 2007

Connolly column
Yes, I think it should go ahead but Fluffy disapeared so I let the matter drop. I haven't seen the Irish in SCW page, but I'll havea look. And yes, someone should be sorting all this out! What are your thoughts? Jdorney (talk) 12:35, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

United Irish
Thanks for your support. The other contributor today who put in the date of martial law in 1797, and the lack of support from the Catholic heirarchy wasn't wrong. S/he should have brought a ref, which would be easy enough.Red Hurley (talk) 16:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

RE. Masked Marvel dab page proposal
If you've a moment, can you take a look at this ([]), and give me your opinion. I hope to start work on this a little later today, and may need some pointers. Thanks. --- RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  19:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That seems reasonable, I suggest you be bold and create a dab page. I'll be happy to help where I can, just drop me a message. Knowledge Of Self  |  talk  19:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is precisely my intention. If I get hung-up, I'll seek your assistance.  Thanks. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  20:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems that the first thing I need to do is move Masked Marvel to The Masked Marvel (comics), and then use Masked Marvel as the dab page. Does that seem logical to you? ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  20:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That makes sense to me&mdash;and to double check I asked an other admin on IRC and she agrees it is a logical next step. It's a go. :) Knowledge Of Self  |  talk  21:01, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Next step would be either A) bypass the redirect and start your dab page or B) I delete the redirect and you start from scratch&mdash;either way is fine. Knowledge Of Self  |  talk  21:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Radiohead
Hi, I've put the Radiohead article up for a peer review, and would welcome your opinions on it. Thanks. Atlantik (talk) 21:09, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

RE: Charles Fourier page
Thank you for your input. That was a slight oversight on my part. HIS33407vinnie (talk) 05:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The Clash
Hi RepublicanJacobite, You "added intro length template; this introductory section is entirely too long" to The Clash article, but the introduction was 2,726 bytes (references excluded) and 4 paragraphs long. According to Wikipedia:Lead section, "The appropriate length of the lead section depends on the total length of the article. As a general guideline, the lead should be no longer than four paragraphs", where two or three paragraphs are around 32 kilobytes = 20,000 characters, so your edit was unnecessary (if I understood the guideline correctly). In any case, I moved one paragraph into the body of the article, and now the introduction is 1,907 bytes with three paragraphs. Is possible to remove the intro length from the article??? Thank you in advance Pjoef 20:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi RepublicanJacobite, thank you very much for your prompt reply. I really appreciated it. About the "discussing the matter", you teach me that Wikipedia is (or should be) written collaboratively, so the collaboration is what can make Wikipedia a great place for learners and teachers, and most generally a place for Culture (with the capital C).  Wikipedia is also a great place for discussions!  I recently created a new WikiProject related to the Clash (WikiProject The Clash) to better organize information and improve all articles related to.  The invitation template is below.  Thank you again, and have a nice weekend. Pjoef 10:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

202.82.33.202
Hi there, Jacobite. I know this ip belongs to blocked user User:Spinoza1111, who in real life is Edward Nilges. I know that because he says so and because he frequently signs his comments with either his real name or with Spinoza1111. He was blocked because of harassing users who had a problem with his POV editing. His editing style has not changed as you can see. I never made any work of reporting the ip, because I know he has access to other ip addresses and this way I can at least keep track of him. If you don't want to take my word for it, I can find a few diffs for you when I have more time.--Atlan (talk) 12:33, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeats
To be honest, I'm not in favour of an infobox for the sake of it. On some articles they are an improvement, but with others it's not always necessary. My philosophy is that there's more productive things that can be done, sometimes it's best just to move on. One Night In Hackney 303  02:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not so much whether you're right or wrong (especially as it's a style issue) but that on many articles you'll find editors, who rightly or wrongly, are resistant to change. So it's a balancing act between the time spent trying to convince them of the merits of your change against the net improvement to the article. With infoboxes I don't think spending hours in that way is a productive use of time, but that's just me. One Night In Hackney  303  02:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

AFD on Anti-Americanism
I noticed that the AFD submission on that Dec 05 page and the subpage are both somehow weirdly formed. I don't know how to fix them for you, or I would lend a hand. cheers, --guyzero | talk 04:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Evil River
Yeah, I was hoping I'd find it had finally been released, too. This is actually what happened with the Restored Text version of Naked Lunch. 2 years after its release had pretty much been declared not happening, it suddenly started showing up in bookstores. I bet the same will happen with Evil River, too. 23skidoo (talk) 21:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Version 1.0 template
It was some strange problem with the template. I removed it and left the Wikiproject a note here. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Howdy
I've noticed your action around some anarchism-related articles lately, so figured I'd invite you to join the Anarchism Task Force we've created. Cheers! Murderbike (talk) 20:51, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Situationist International
Thanks for your recent work on this article. I felt that I ought to tread warily there, but you've made some of the obvious improvements that were needed. EdJohnston (talk) 22:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

More Honey, Less Vinegar
For an edit on the surrealism page, you wrote: "RV to previous version by Nv8200p; reverting unnecessary and unhelpful edits". Ouch! All the user did was add one single name of an artist to the list of surrealists. All you did was take it out. Your comment seems overly harsh. What's the deal? --Nik (talk) 14:45, 21 December 2007 (UTC)