User talk:Ww2censor/Archive6

Talk page • Archive1 • Archive2 • Archive3 • Archive4 • Archive5 • Archive6

Hard worker deserves a break!
Enjoy yourself Ww; be sure to come back. Nice touch adding G's pic...kinda sad but inspiring. (Sarah777 21:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC))

Have fun etc etc... Been staying off Wikipedia myself for the last few days trying to finish stuff (generic stuff :O) ) in the non-wiki world, barring the odd foray, but I should be back again properly at the weekend. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 22:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Maffey
The particular paragraph began with something like "Maffey urged ... " and I felt that if the reader had dipped into the middle of the article (as I had) they may not have been clear who Maffey was at this point, and might even possibly think he was an Irish minister. So I mistakenly put ambassador as I had clicked on Maffey and noted that the page had List of Ambassadors from the United Kingdom to the Republic of Ireland linked at the bottom, and had assumed that he held the title ambassador. I had no reason to think otherwise. I was "corrected" by User:MAG1, but he replaced the word "ambassador" with the word "minister" and put "Correct. There were no ambassadors in Ireland as the British Commonwealth was a diplomatic entity then." in his edit summary. Following this I realised my mistake, but also noted that the word MAG1 had used was equally incorrect, and so I replaced the word "minister" with the word "representative", and I put "fair enough - but minister is just as wrong" in the edit summary. I fail to see how this edit summary can lead you to believe that "[my] edit comment seems to question [the usage of representative]", if anything it affirms it! Jooler 23:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It was not that you comment so much questioned the description of Maffey but that his title was in question prior to your correction and you seem to have it right now. Cheers ww2censor 23:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Return of the prodigious son....
Welcome back, refreshed I hope. As you see article collection has continued but at a slower pace....time to roll yer sleeves up!(Sarah777 07:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC))

Postal History - Mail by Rail
Thank you for your welcome to Wikipedia!

I am as yet rather inexperienced in contributing to Wikipedia - but hope to learn!

I am a member of a long-established Postal History Society and have a reasonable knowledge of matters relating to the PH of Northern England and mails by rail and by air.

Have tried to improve the introductory wording to 'Postal History' but would be very happy for you to 'watch over my shoulder' and amend as necessary. I was trying to clarify that general public mail, as well as court etc mail, falls within 'prestamp-mail'.

My sources re the 1830 date for railway mail are : (1) 'Mail by Rail' by Peter Johnson, Ian Allan, 1995, pages 9-10, ISBN 0 7110 2385 9 and (2) 'A History of the Manchester Post Office 1625-1900' by Charles Calvert published privately in 1966.

In addition, various numeral marks are known to have been applied to some letters carried by the Liverpool and Manchester Railway from 1833 onwards - I have three of these rare items in my collection.

I do not yet know how to add these references to my contribution and would be grateful if you could help!

Sincerely RuthAS —Preceding unsigned comment added by RuthAS (talk • contribs) 20:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Ireland portal
Ww2, I saw you're message on the notice board re: the portal. What's involved? Basically, sure, I'm bored and want to start doing more, I'd adopt it. --sony-youth pléigh 20:06, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, so I see you have already jumped in the deep end - that's great. I deal with the philately portal, (not that it is so great but it exists and gets updated every now and then) so I have some experience if you need some guidance. There are several sub-pages on the portal that should be updated with some regularity with appropriate data and you can always add new pages. I find it useful to create a set of several rotatable topics that can be reused every now and then on some of the sub-pages, but Ireland probably have sufficient pages that this will not be necessary. You might want to add a sub-page with links to new articles and don't forget to promote it wherever you can on all appropriate noticeboards. Remember to balance the topics shown at any one time; an NPOV is a good attitude to take. Good luck and cheers. ww2censor 23:05, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the advice before. Could you take a look at my final rejig (certain there are spelling mistakes in parts, I'll clear those when my eyes stop bleeding!) your views on my re-working would be appreciated. I'd like to keep it updated daily (we've so many article, it should be doable). If you can think of anything, could you recommend a couple of things here? Thanks again for before. --sony-youth pléigh 21:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Irish stamps
Hello Ww2censor,

It's my pleasure to announce you that the Postage stamps of Ireland article is now an article de qualité in French too. I look forward to going to Ireland again soon (and sorry for the rugby match yesterday ;-)). Thanks again for your great contribution, cordially, Kokin 07:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:00, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Article assessment update September 27, 2007
You might take a look at the latest batch of assessments. It seems the consistency is being lost especially with "high" and "top" importance; eg the Senate is "top", the Taoiseach is only "high". Many more examples. Do we need some process to control "high" and "top" rating? (Sarah777 01:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC))
 * Working late!!! Nice modification of my page notice!
 * Some of those ratings may have been mine, but working late, like you are, is not so good for a clear mind. I have modified Taoiseach but modify any others if you think should be higher or lower if more appropriate, or ask me to weigh in on any others you think are not appropriate. Cheers. ww2censor 02:06, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that! Never noticed...but I see you have posted a warning now. Not all the assessments were yours by any means; I tend to not assess above "high" - leave that to the experts like yourself! Regards (Sarah777 22:58, 28 September 2007 (UTC))
 * No problem at all. I don't know that I am such an expert but I suspect that in future we will need to discuss high and top ratings, but I am sure you are well able to be objective too. Cheers ww2censor 23:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice to be back


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you very much for welcoming me back to WP. I shall keep an eye on the philately project and join in when I can, time allowing. By the way, I see a contact of mine (calling herself Saipan Sam) had a brief flirtation with the site and contributed a bit to philately. I'll try and persuade her to give it another try. All the best. --BlackJack | talk page 18:41, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * TVM. Sam did some work and then seemed to get pissed off. Not really sure why though she may have thought I rubbed her up the wrong way for being bold and possibly overstepping her newby mark concerning this. See you later. ww2censor 19:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Latest stats
Hi Ww, I am a bit concerned with about a dozen bands being graded "high" class. Snow Patrol and Stiff Little Fingers as important as Sinn Fein or the Church of Ireland? Hardly even close IMHO. Please take a look. Regards (Sarah777 14:51, 6 October 2007 (UTC))
 * None of these bands have stood the test of time for generations, so should at best be mid or low. That seems to be Flowerpotman. Let's have a word with him. Why don't you bring it up at the assessments talk page. Nearly 4,000!! I am finding all sorts of categories that have been completely untouched. ww2censor 14:57, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Hadn't noticed Flowerpot was the guilty party! Guess we know his taste in music so.(Sarah777 19:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC))
 * errr....I will readily concede Stiff Little Fingers :O). Ash, I think was a misplaced paste. Will go to assessments page on the others though. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 03:55, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * That line again! Profound apologies...(Sarah777 09:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC))

Smaller lead pic
I note that you believe a smaller lead pic is necessary in Stockbook. This is a nuisance to those of us with big monitors (mine is 1680 by 1050) and it is not acceptable that you want to force on me an image smaller than the 300px I have set in User Prefs. Here's the WP:MOS extract; ''Specifying the size of a thumb image is not recommended: without specifying a size the width will be what readers have specified in their user preferences, with a default of 180px (which applies for most readers). However, the image subject or image properties may call for a specific image width to enhance the readability or layout of an article. Cases where specific image width are considered appropriate include:'' On images with extreme aspect ratios When using detailed maps, diagrams or charts When a small region of an image is considered relevant, but the image would lose its coherence when cropped to that region On a lead image that captures the essence of the article. ''Bear in mind that some users need to configure their systems to display large text. Forced large thumbnails can leave little width for text, making reading difficult.''

It does not say it has to be smaller! I have been reading articles and contributing to articles since early 2003 and have 16000 edits. In all that time I have never met a reduced size start pic (except, of course,sometimes in infoboxes and taxoboxes). - Adrian Pingstone 19:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Now you are really trying to confuse my by removing your post while I am writing a reply for the Stockbook talk page !


 * I hear you, but you are the first person to complain about having too big a monitor and therefore images that you think the images are too small. I have had people discuss images being too big for their monitors, especially laptop users. BTW I also am running a 1680 x 1050 resolution monitor and I too have been around and am only 6,000 edits behind you; as if that really makes any difference. The image size I chose was actually larger than the default pref setting because the thumbnail looked too small for the essence of the article and a larger lead image still seems appropriate, except in your case. May I refer you to Manual_of_Style where you will see that an exception to thumbnail image use is "On a lead image that captures the essence of the article." and it also goes on to talk say "Forced large thumbnails can leave little width for text, making reading difficult." which is the opposite to what you are experiencing; that the image actually is too small for you. So what would you prefer to do, when an article cries out for a larger than standard image size in the lead so that everyone is happy? There has to be a solution. ww2censor 20:07, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. I find no problem here, just set all pics the same by removing the px value on the lot and then no "solution" is necessary because there is no problem to solve. Then I can have all at 300px as I wish and others who have set no Prefs can see all theirs at 180px.


 * I don't ever get into the reverting game so whatever you wish I'll leave alone. PS My comment on my number of edits was intended only to show I'm not a newbie talking without proper experience of WP, Best - Adrian Pingstone 20:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * So are you going to change all articles where the lead images are no set to thumbnail size? In my edit travels I see many many lead images set smaller than 300px (from 150px to 275px) and what about ones that are larger than your setting of 300px, such as Blue Riband? ww2censor 20:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * If a pic is set BIG for good reason (no matter where it is on the article) then of course I won't reduce its size BUT if the lead (or any other pic) has an unreasonably SMALL px value then I certainly will remove it. I have done this to many hundreds of articles without a single complaint on my Talk Page. In this case my complaint was TOO SMALL a lead pic. Have a look at the lead pic size (on the edit by Sdobnovik) and you will see it has a pic width of 150px. I found that too small for my 1680px screen so I removed its px value, producing, for me, a 300px pic width because that is the value I have set in User Prefs. That doesn't seem too odd a thing to do! You surely don't believe that 150px was OK on a 1680 screen? I have so much else to do on WP so this is my final entry here, nice to talk to you, Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 21:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Shopping in Dublin
Following a debate about the proposed deletion of 4 shopping centres/retail parks in Letterkenny it was "agreed" (without, I may add any prior agreement from me) to merge them into "Shopping in Letterkenny". After the fact I agreed that specifically in relation to these 4 centres and in their current state I'd go along with the merge. Now I see the same editors are proposing to merge all Dublin Centres into a "Shopping in Dublin" article; including The Square, Dundrum, Blanchardstown and Liffey Valley. As, for example, Dundrum upon completion will be the largest in Europe the notion that we cannot have a separate article about it is outrageous and I utterly and totally oppose this merge. As it appears you suggest the Letterkenny one, perhaps you'd take a look at the current proposal. (Sarah777 16:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC))


 * Already commented but cannot agree with you on this one. Dundrum Town Centre has only 7 or 8 half decent short sentences of interest with mainly padding and this could easily be incorporated into a decent longer article on shopping in Dublin and its general developments. Then we are not restricted to just shopping centres but can talk about high street shopping and its issues/demise in the suburbs. I would suggest IMHO that it is outrageous to have stubs that tell us nothing much. These days it seems that quantity rather than quality is the key (not necessarily you). If the Dundrum Town Centre section became so large, detailed and interesting that it merited its own article I would definitely not oppose a de-merge but that time really is not now. None of these are anything more that crappy stubs that are padded with fluff. ww2censor 17:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Could hardly disagree more, Ww. The subject of Dundrum (and some other) major shopping centres in Dublin are noteworthy in their own right. The fact that the current article is poor is not relevant; there are countless stubs on Wiki; they are the seeds from which articles grow. Stubs of things deemed noteworthy are deemed suitable to be left in place (try and delete a three-line townland stub and see!); Dundrum is intrinsically noteworthy. (Sarah777 18:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC))


 * Agree that Dundrum Town Centre is noteworthy but not for much more than being the largest in Ireland. Basically its is just another shopping centre. While it is the largest shopping centre, and that stubs can grow into better articles I think it is better served by being included in a Shopping in Dublin article where it might get more attention and maybe grow to a state where it needs to be de-merged off into its own article. Are the other shopping centres noteworthy? Marginally but do they deserve their own article, I really don't think so. But that's just my opinion and you think differently. Let's just see where the consensus comes out. ww2censor 21:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I have discovered that there appears to be an international move on Wiki to delete Shopping Centre articles. There are articles about insignificant hills, tiny uninhabited islands, old isolated churches, 4-rock megaliths (many of which I've started myself in all these categories) and they are NEVER challenged on notability; yet Tallaght Town Centre (The Square), employing maybe 1,000 people, a major urban landmark, a major commercial centre isn't notable?? Pull the other one! This is prejudiced pov-agenda stuff, not any rational consistent appraisal. Asa I mentioned elsewhere, I had zero interest in "Malls" till I noticed the attacks on them. (Sarah777 21:45, 13 October 2007 (UTC))


 * Exactly what I'm on about Ww2censor. Will you post agreement on Shopping in Dublin article. --Balloholic 22:14, 13 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Exactly what you are on about? What, exactly, are you on about? Perhaps you'd actually address my comments on The Square, Tallaght? No? (Sarah777 22:21, 13 October 2007 (UTC))


 * Exactly what am I on about is that I see this differently than you do. That's all. Is the Square notable? Most likely it is and I would agree with you about that fact, but you would not know it from the current article. I still think ALL of these Dublin shopping centres are, for now, better served by a good comprehensive article on Shopping in Dublin—the individual articles are all basically rubbish. Are the current articles, stub or start articles, indeed they are, but do they really convey anything interesting or encyclopaedic? In my view they don't and I have said so on the talk page. We just don't see them the same way, that's all. Can you improve all the shopping centre articles to a decent level so that the would stand alone in their own right before a consensus is reached? If you could then the debate is academic. ww2censor 00:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry Ww, my remarks were not addressed to you. I didn't understand what Balloholic meant by his reply to you "exactly what I was on about". Your (Ww's) position was very clearly and elegantly stated, as always! (Sarah777 13:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC))


 * I was agreeing with Ww2censor. All Dublin shopping centres should be put in one article. I think they would be better served there, easier to find and if they notably expand they can have their own article. --Balloholic 13:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Cabal
Hi. I just want to mention that my proposal for a merge has been made in good faith. I am not a member of a shadowy cabal attempting to delete all, any, and every article about shopping centres. As you might have already seen here and here, I have had disagreements with another editor. However, these have also had no bearing on my proposal, which, as you can see, was made alongside an editor, Balloholic, who creates and maintains shopping centre articles. The "cabal" accusations are offensive and untrue, and there is no evidence for them. Pathless 17:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 02:48, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

fr:Famille Yvert
Hello. I need to take some distance from fr.wikipedia, so I decided to translate some biographies of French philatelists.

I have a question : can I tanslate this genealogical article Famille Yvert without fearing a deletion debate? The Yvert family was at the origin of Yvert et Tellier. And right now, I don't want to face another deletion debate. Sebjarod 19:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't really tell you that it would not be nominated for deletion as it is rather a short, not very notable looking, article in French, but why don't you create a section in the Yvert & Tellier article for the family history and make a redirect page from Yvert family or whatever you will call it. That seems better than risking a deletion. BTW, what was deleted on you previously? ww2censor 20:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Good idea, thank you. On fr, articles about two Paris stamp dealers were on debate with intervention of newbies : a merchant estimates his firm got the right of importance (while no redaction or Wikipedia-admissible sources were given) and now an anti-advertisment philatelist cleans with the word "autopromotion" at every corner (while I am the creator, and do not work in philatelic commerce). Have a good break. Sebjarod 15:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Something to delight you!
Talk:Halloween; they are following your example...(Sarah777 20:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC))

Importance ratings
Hi there, I just noticed that you had rated Families in the Oireachtas was low importance, and I raised it to mid, as per my note on the article's comment page.

I then thought I should look at a few others, and Neil Blaney was also low-importance. That's odd: he played a crucial in govt and politics for a few years, and is notable as a central figure in the arms trial. I'd have thought that he should be at least mid-importance, though I haven't changed it.

Also Comhaltas Ceoltóirí Éireann, which I upped to mid: the article is weak, but the organisation was one of the crucial motor for the renaissance of traditional music.

I wonder should we have a discussion on the project page about how we approach the ratings, because I think that we seem to be setting rather difft priorities, and it might help for us to see if we can agree on guidelines or criteria or something! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with you on those articles you mentioned above. I will change Neil Blaney to mid per your justification. Sometimes I lash through them so quickly and paste my basic "start or stub/low" assessment and move one, but as with you using the AWB, while I do give the article a quick look, I may not read it all or be familiar with the topic despite my years of living in Ireland. We already had quite a discussion on the criteria some time ago in which you did not participate thought you may have seen it or maybe you were not around or watching. In general there does not seem to be disagreement on the ratings too often and if there is, the raising or lowering is usually justified by someone else, as in these cases, who knows the topic better than the initial assessor. Unless there is serious difference of opinion I don't see any point in raising the matter again, but of course you are welcome to raise it again now if you think it appropriate. ww2censor 03:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a comment (now that I'm finished editing your page W)- when tagging articles I tend to go for the lowest rating where there might be any doubt, in the hope that once the article is tagged other editors will give a considered opinion of the areas they are interested in. We all tend to over-rate the stuff we find interesting; see Sandyford Industrial Estate. I think this "start low" approach is the safest; but of course we could produce guideline 'recommendations' as we have for geo-stubs and some other topics.


 * (after edit conflict) Fair enough on the first point! We're obviously on similar tracks, and I'm sure that no amount of discussion would alter the likelihood that sometimes any of may have an initial take on things which others might not share.
 * However, on your second reply, my initial thought is that it might be a bad idea to under-rate things, because there with 25,000 articles, the low-importance category is likely to be huge. If anything is marginal or doubtful, I suggest it may be better to leave it with an unassessed importance or to err on the high side, because it will be easier to find a few over-promoted articles than to wade through the thousands of low-priority articles to find the under-promoted ones. What do you think of that idea? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Upon mature reflection, as Brian Lenihan (not tagged!) might say - you are right. As we have seen people are more likely to react to an article they reckon is over-rated. I hereby do a U-turn on the issue and will amend my tagging accordingly. (Sarah777 11:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC))

German-Irish
Great catch. You are correct, and I think I may have missed a few others this morning... Hiberniantears 18:47, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Bot tagging discussion
Just in case you aren't watching the project pages, I thought I'd leave a link to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland, where I'd welcome your comments. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Page moves
Hey, if you want to move a page like Postage stamps and postal history of Chad and can't because you can't delete the destination, just let me know and I'll do it (I do check watchlist daily), so we can preserve edit history. Stan 15:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I forgot to ask, I just tranposed the data but as you say that does not do anything for the history.

Auto archive
Ww, I find it excellent - but I didn't set it up myself; can't even remember who did - have to check. (Sarah777 01:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC))

1411 and all that
Ww, take a look at the rating of importance in this (and, I assume, two thousand other similar articles) - what do you think?? (Sarah777 22:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC))
 * Hardly even notable. I have noticed some of these year articles with little of nothing in them, though I did add some events to 1859 in Ireland the other day, to give it some substance. I searched for the year and Ireland and looked for appropriate Irish events, births or deaths. I just rerated 1411 as low but some of these should probably not even be here. I assume this was your thoughts too. ww2censor 03:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

George Moore
Did you save your changes in a txt? If so, just paste over my version and I can restore the refs later. I had an edit conflict with you too earlier, very annoying; but I'll leave the page alone for an hour or so, and let you work away. Ceoil 22:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh and I never use templates for cites, they are not required, add unnecessary html, are hard to follow, and give inconsistent results. I'll likely revert any you add. Ceoil 22:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks; that slightly peeved msg above not withstanding, it would be great to work with you on this. Lets ask for a week or two extra time on the FAR. Ceoil 22:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Your place or mine, eh? Ok your place. I saw your FAC at the time (didn't know enough to comment), but no, its not a requirment, shame that nominators get bullied into redundant tempaltes like this. Anyway, I still only taking stock of the article at the moment, and reading up on the sources, but I do think the effort need to save this would be well spent. Best. Ceoil 22:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Stop with the tempates please. What do they add? They are only a guide for beginners. Ceoil 22:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, but if I make several references from the same book from different pages, then one gets a long list of refs that are all full of basically the same stuff except for different page numbers. If that's ok with you, then it is fine with me too, but I don't want either of us to have to repeat work unnecessarily. Till later then and nor more citation template, just text refs. ww2censor 22:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Have a look at how it is handled at William Butler Yeats. Ceoil 22:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I just ordered the Frazier book through my library system and hope it will arrive later in the week. I am hoping that, as it seemed to be the main source originally used, it will have the quotation references that are unsourced. BTW, what refs do you have there now. I also found some googlebooks that can be used—some new and some older. Let me know if you want the names. Cheers ww2censor 14:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Can you let me know the names of those googlebooks, please so. Ceoil 09:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I just got the Frazier book - it is a tomb of 624 pages and would take at least a week to read even if I had the time. I do have some smaller books that I am reading at the moment and in reading those realise that the current page is definitely less then comprehensive. There are lots of details about the publishing of the books, their banning, etc. that will enhance it. Much to do I think.
 * Irish Fiction: An Introduction Kersti Tarien Powell pps 59-62
 * The History of English Literature William Vaughn Moody pps 433-435, 453, 486
 * The Personal Equation H.T Peck pps 87-132 - I already have this as a ref but it is substantial
 * Many of his Moore's books are available at the gutenberg project and there a few interesting comments to be found in the NYT archives. Cheers ww2censor 17:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ceoil I have a question for you. I thought it appropriate that a writer like Moore would have his works listed, so I added those I could find easily, but later I happened to go back through the article history and saw that you had removed a previous list of his works. Was there some good reason to remove them or should they not be there? I would expect an FA to list as much as possible of a writer's works. ww2censor 16:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

BHGbot
Any comments on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Ireland? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Derry, County Sligo
A tag has been placed on Derry, County Sligo, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

This article refers to somewhere that is nothing more than a name on some maps, not even a collection of houses. To even call it a townland is pushing it.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -- The.Q (t) (c) 13:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Conflicting styles
See diffs below from the article Kildare; as you two are amongst the most prolific contributors to Irish articles best get agreement on these style issues: (Sarah777 18:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC))
 * 1) (cur) (last)  17:58, November 10, 2007 Ww2censor (Talk | contribs) m (5,422 bytes) (removed unnecessary links - only full date are linked per MOS) (undo)
 * 2) (cur) (last) 13:03, November 10, 2007 Ardfern (Talk | contribs) (5,430 bytes) (Tidied up) (undo)
 * I intended leaving a message about his improper linking, but you got here before I did so. Cheers ww2censor 23:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

France/Ireland joint issue 1996
Hello. I was looking for the Irish counterpart of this French stamp from the 1996 joint issue. I finally found it in my Yvert et Tellier catalogue. But, the radically different design far away from the topic (Irish imaginary) and a legend in French quizzed me. Do you know if, in 1996, this Irish stamp was well-received by Irish philatelists? I suspect a stamp issued by politeness to France, but not a serious effort, am I wrong? Sebjarod 21:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)