User talk:Ww2censor/Archive9

Talk page • Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 • Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 • Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9

'Puca - Poulaphouca' edit
Hi ww2, i'm not sure if this is the right place to ask but i notice you edited my addition to the 'puca' page. my reason for adding a "see also; Poulaphouca" note was because i'm pretty sure the name 'poulaphouca' is translated as 'hole of the puca'. i'm not 100% sure but i just thought it was worthy of adding to the poulaphouca page. oh well. if you get the time could you email me at jimmmypeas@gmail.com. i would just be interested as to how to go about adding things legitimately. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.100.250.230 (talk) 23:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You need to provide a verifiable source, which, from your comment, I doubt you can provide. Otherwise it is original research or crystal balling. Please sign your posts. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 23:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Alright, thanks. but I made an addition to the Blessington page recently adding that 'the remains of roads are still to be seen leading into the lake' and, (although it is entirely true) I added no proof whatsoever of the claim and it has not been deleted. Could you explain that please? thanks. sorry I don't know how to sign posts. :/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.100.250.230 (talk) 23:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Not every edit has a reference or source quoted though if it could be questioned it should provide one. I am pretty sure I could find one for the old visible Blessington Lakes roads; a photo might do the job too. In the past references were not required, but due to the criticism of the verifiability of Wikipedia, references and sources are now requested to prove the veracity of statements. Some editors do remove some new unsourced edits; I do this occasionally but it depends on what it is. Sign by adding 4 tildes, try this page for more info. Why not get a registered account and not worry about getting a different IP address to edit from the next time you log on? Cheers ww2censor (talk) 03:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hindenburg Images
Please see my post at User_talk:Rlandmann (Centpacrr (talk) 01:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC))

Editing and Tag Cleanup
Thank you for the discrete and civil way you edited my contribution article Finbar Wright. Any help is greatly appreciated. I need advice in cleaning up a tag on self-same Discussion page - After editing and cleaning up content who do I write to have the BLP-deletion tag removed. Again thank you, Walknnirishrain 14:08 3 July 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Walknnirishrain (talk • contribs) 18:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. The BLP tag is a warning notice that comes as part of the Biography WikiProject and is affixed to all living persons as a warning to try to ensure non-libellous edits that are properly sourced are all that is added. In my assessment critique I mention the references too. Have a look at some of the Irish featured article of people to see how reference are done properly. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 18:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation...it is tough for a person to know all the rules/policies but with kind help such as yours we can learn. I understand now the references issue, but wouldn't the links to such articles etc, go out of date at some point? On the official fan club website we do have 95% of the articles archived - would those be sufficient for "Reference" links? I did want to ask if the page is, in your opinion, acceptable under Wiki standards now with the editing I've done the past few days? Regards, --Walknnirishrain (talk) 18:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Let's just look at the reference thing for a minute. If you go to George Moore and look at ref #30 which happens to be broken now, you will see that it has an access date of January 2007, but sometimes you can search a site and find the new location, so fixing the link. However, I could not find it but if I go to [http//;www.archive.org archive.org] and paste in the original link, I get this page and knowing the January 2007 date I will click on the next earliest date and there, for the Dec 28 page we have an archived version of the original assessed page to review. Some editors will now link to that page. In your case I would step carefully as your words may indicate some conflict of interest on your part. Besides which fan sites are not verifiable sources. You need to look for better ones; newspaper, well known news websites and critical books will be better. The Irish Music Association's link does not bring you to the award page and it should, but I could not find one, so just make the statement and unlink it until you find a newspaper reference, or some such. But one step at a time. Two similar portraits add nothing to the article. Images should really be there to illustrate associated text, which your does not do. Do you have a picture of him singing with the Irish tenors, or some other interesting addition? There is also no real need for a section heading "Biography" because the whole article IS a biography. There should be nothing redundant in the article, otherwise it seems ok for the length which is quite short for now. BTW, we use the piped link Ireland] because Ireland directs you to the geographic island article not the country (don't ask). Cheers ww2censor (talk) 21:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the tips - noted. Will search out the references on hand and see if links are available. Also uploaded a new photo. Perhaps, with all the editting and updating, the "caution sign" on the Wiki-Ireland stamp might be removed? Just asking. Thank you for all the help ! --Walknnirishrain (talk) 02:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll remove the attention tag for now, but I must say the photo quality is not great and you are not supposed to force the size of the images per MOS image guidelines. I will also remove the unnecessary image and the biography section head. If there was enough text you could use "Early Life" and "Career" as section headings. BTW add an extra semi-colon to indent each post. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 02:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the assist! I have set about following your advice and cleaned up the article considerably, and continue to do so...hopefully this will contiue to improve. Again, thanks!--Walknnirishrain (talk) 14:00, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

History of Limerick
Hi Ww2, just wanted to let you know about this. I'm not going to tackle it myself, but I though it was worth mentioning to you, at least. Regards, Ceoil  sláinte 18:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Already noticed it and am looking for sources, but I'm busy on a big citation project right now, so don't know if I can do enough. Thanks anyway. ww2censor (talk) 18:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thats grand; best of luck with it. Ceoil  sláinte 18:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Postal code page
Hi,

Could you explain why you remove the link I just put on the Postal code page ? This website is very useful to find a postcode, there is no other page like this on the internet (if you know one, tell me). Fred. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.247.186.85 (talk • contribs) (10:49, 13 July 2008)


 * Two reasons, first, it is a pay for site, therefore fails WP:EL and it does not provide postal codes. It provides geographical co-ordinates and this article is about postal code used by postal authorities, so is an inappropriate link, even if it was a free site. Therefore it is not useful at all for postal codes. BTW, do you have any conflict of interest as I see this has been inserted by another unregistered user three days ago with a very similar IP address to this one today. Was that you also? Please sign you posts. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 15:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reply, but I think you don't even look at this site, it's absolutly not a pay for site, it displays postal codes of all countries listed, it's totally free and useful for everyone. Of course there is also a link to buy some files, so what ?
 * I think this site is totally adequate for this page, but you just removed the link 5 secs after it was online, so please take some time to check before remove work done by other people, thanks. (ok, I'm a newbee as wikipedia editor, I will create an account soon, that's not a reason to remove what I did). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.247.186.85 (talk) 17:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * So, some content is free, but it is a commercial site selling geocode databases. More importantly this site DOES NOT provide postcodes, it provides geographical coordinates. That is not a postcode, so does not belong and it is not useful at all. I just looked up my postcode and no postcode is given. I also checked other countries whose postcodes I know and these were not given either. Totally useless of finding postcodes. Sorry ww2censor (talk) 00:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Ireland Edit
User:Sennen goroshi just followed me on to this article and reverted to make a point because I had reverted him on another article. Editor has IMO no real interest in improving the article. BigDunc Talk 18:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that happens! ww2censor (talk) 19:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Maura O'Halloran
You know what's funny?

a)I work for Wisdom publications and have the right to use whatever words I want to from our books. b)That you are from Ireland and have basically stopped me from creating a wiki page for one of the great Irish women in the last fifty years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmywebber (talk • contribs) 13:03, 19 July 2008
 * A - you don't, unless you release them to Wikipedia under a suitable licence
 * B - I did not stop you from creating a page for a great Irish woman, I stopped you from violating copyright.
 * If you follow the instructions in the template it will be better - removing templates is regarded as vandalism and may get you blocked from editing. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 18:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Franking article issues
Discussion moved to to the Franking talk page to reach a wider, more interested audience. ww2censor (talk) 03:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments on Draft Airmail article re-write
Moved discussion to Airmail talk page. ww2censor (talk) 03:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: DYK
Thanks for the heads-up, WW2censor. I will get right on it. :) - Hexhand (talk) 21:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, good luck. ww2censor (talk) 21:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Tah dah. Article expanded. Plus, I changed the article title back to Contaminated currency, once I found info regarding the contamination of British currency as well. I haven't looked into the Chinese remimbi or the Japanese yen, but that might prove interesting as well. - Hexhand (talk) 00:14, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

An Post and the UPU
I was mucking around with this Postal Administration thing and when I went to the An Post article to gain some insight into how postal operators might be characterized, I found the article contained the following phase: An Post provides a universal postal service to all parts of the Republic of Ireland and is a member of the Universal Postal Union. If I remember my International Law correctly, I don't think that An Post or any other postal agency is a member of the treaty organization UPU. Ireland is the member state (Ireland signed the treaty) and An Post is just part of Ireland's Postal Administration which is governed by the UPC conventions. Do you think my interpretation is correct?--Mike Cline (talk) 19:23, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll have a look at that as i have some An Post documents here. Later ww2censor (talk) 22:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Pagsanjan Falls stamp error DYK

 * Oops, my apologies. I had a feeling the source wasn't reliable enough to support the claim, but on the other hand the article/hook didn't seem very notable without such a claim. In retrospect I guess I should have gone with my instinct about the source, but hindsight's a wonderful thing. Gatoclass (talk) 04:43, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Not a real problem. Indeed the original hook was maybe the one to go with but with so little time I was not going to override you DYK admin guys. There has already been discussion about the value and some edits to clarify matters. Cheers & thanks ww2censor (talk) 04:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Anyhow, I just tweaked the hook a tad on the front page as I thought the replacement hook was a bit lame. Thanks for the heads up :) Gatoclass (talk) 04:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Fáilte Towers
Thank you. I think I ought to have more than enough prose now without disrupting my good standard of sources. :) --Candlewicke Consortiums Limited 11:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Dublin Climate
Hi, I see an anon IP keeps adding to the Dublin article on the record rainfall at Dublin Airport for August. I'd already posted a question on Talk about this. I've included a reference from the RTE news report. But I'm not sure if we want to add it anyway...any thoughts? --HighKing (talk) 16:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Are we going to add a climate detail for every unusual event? I doubt it, as it is likely to be surpassed sone enough. Besides which, this is the general article about Dublin not about Dublin weather. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 16:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * As it turns out, I agree with you and I said as much on the Talk page. It's just that you reverted with the reason that the fact is unsourced.  It might be better to revert using the reason that this section is not the place for news or records instead (in case the anon IP editor or another editor decides to produce a reference) --HighKing (talk) 17:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed that is probably a better reason but his edit was in fact unsourced. ww2censor (talk) 17:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * HighKing: Never mind the "unsourced" tag - its just the man who calls himself the Censor in action again - censors by the nature of the word do not have to have justifiable reasons 83.71.80.104 (talk) 06:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

List of postal services abroad
Ww2Censor - I posted a question here about list inclusion criteria. Any thoughts??--Mike Cline (talk) 13:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

User Names
Under Wiki Rules user names should not give an impression of authority which is unwarranted. The name you have chosen which includes the word "Censor" contravenes wiki rules. Please change your name - You have been advised of this conflict before and have chosen to ignore advisories - even as a self declared censor you are not beyond Wiki rules - please sort this out 83.71.80.104 (talk) 06:43, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * So take it to Usernames for administrator attention if you are so concerned. There is not "self declared censorship" going on, just reverting an unsourced edit. This user name issue has only been mentioned by two editors who did not like the fact that I reverted their unsourced or inaccurate edits reverted made according to Wikipedia policy or guidelines after 17,000+ edits. Get real, just verify your edits. ww2censor (talk) 12:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Ww2Censor--Your username has never given me the impression of authority as have your comments and edits. You'll have an ally in me on this one. Clearly you have some philatelic interest in World War 2 Censored Mail.--Mike Cline (talk) 18:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Mike. I think this just some disgruntled anon-IP editor whose edit I reverted and he does not like the reason I removed his edit or maybe just the fact that I removed his edit. I regard this as user page vandalism. Cheers

Ger McDonnell
It's on the Main Page now. :) Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Candlewicke (talk • contribs) 08:50, 19 August 2008

NowCommons: Image:Irl-BrittasBay.jpg
Image:Irl-BrittasBay.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Brittas Bay.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all MediaWiki wiki's. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 13:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Image:Irl-JamesJoyceMartello.jpg is now available as Commons:Image:James Joyce Martello Tower.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 13:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello
Hello, I don't understand, I don't see the answer of your talk page, can you tell me please, thank you. Russian Luxembourger (talk) 21:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you don't understand. Why would you expect to see the answer here? This is my talk page not the talk page of the Dublin article you edited. I don't think you looked very far into the archives of Dublin, did you? Anyway, Flagcruft is not encouraged and you should Help the reader rather than decorate. This edit was the final agreement to an edit war on this topic and the summary speaks for itself and was the end of this discussion on the matter. Since then things have been quite, so I suggest you leave the flagicons out of the article. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 23:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * "So I suggest you leave the flagicons out of the article" We'll see about that. Russian Luxembourger (talk) 00:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you making a threat? I hope not. As a relatively new editor I am just giving you a bit of friendly advise. Should you not want to take that, it is of course your choice, but as I already suggested, you should read WP:FLAGCRUFT carefully. ww2censor
 * I am not making a threat (I dont see myself dong it), you should really understand yourself. Fine, I won't use flags, does that satisfy you? now no more messages about this please, I am fed up with them. Thank you. Russian Luxembourger (talk) 18:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)(talk) 04:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Francis Johnston
The sources I mentioned are bono fide--as well as consulting my own books, I did a cross-check online and the only one at variance was the Independent article, but I don't know what, if any, research the writer did. It appears certain that the original designs were drawn up by William Wilkins, and that Francis Johnston was brought in at some stage. He may have been the project manager (or the equivalent at the time). Some of Johnston's drawings differed from the finished pillar. I have a number of other books about Dublin and can check them to see whether there is any further information to be found.

I have a little more information about the planning for the pillar, which was initiated by the Mayor of the time, and was planning to put it up sometime this week. I only add information that I've checked myself against a book or, occasionally, an online article. Hohenloh (talk) 18:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I pressed the wrong key earlier on. I checked the online bio of Francis Johnston which the article links to, and this doesn't mention Nelson's Pillar.  Also the Dictionary of Irish Biography (by Henry Boylan) lists a number of buildings in Dublin that Johnston was responsible for, but Nelson's Pillar is not one of them. Hohenloh (talk) 18:38, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * That's cool, see what you can find, then you can add an inline citation, with page numbers etc, to the particular information you are adding. That way other users can actually check the references an editor provides, even if it means going to a library. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 19:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I updated the Nelson's Pillar and Francis Johnston articles, but still have some more that I'd like to put up when I get the time. I found  Henchey's article in the Dublin Historical Record, which provides details of the initial history of the Pillar.  Even so, there is still a doubt as to whether Johnston provided a new design (and not just new drawings) or simply modified the original design at the behest of the committee (which would fit into the opinion of most commentators).  Contemporaries of the time and almost all writers except perhaps Henchey accepted that the Pillar was designed by Wilkins.  There's another article in the Architectural Archive in Merrion Square from 1946 that might throw a little light on things, and I guess that both Johnston's and Wilkins original drawings are also stored there. Hohenloh (talk) 00:29, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Whatever you can do to clarify these issues will be great. Thanks for the work. ww2censor (talk) 03:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Reverted edits
I have reverted a number of pages vandalised (that's the only way I can describe it) by 81.157.22.121, just as you did for Dublin. Is anyone watching these pages? Hohenloh (talk) 04:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Who know what people are watching. I already have nearly 600 pages on my watchlist, but only one of the pages he has edited. He mainly seems to be adding an Irish name to Northern Ireland articles which I seem to recall there being an issue with adding Irish names to towns in NI. However some of the Irish names appear to be made up and they certainly have no official standing. I would not necessarily call his edits vandalism, certainly unproductive. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 04:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I had several of these pages on my watchlist and totally incorrect info was put in there. I've checked all and corrected where necessary. Thanks.
 * Oooop, sorry about that!Hohenloh (talk) 04:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

History of Limerick
Hi ww2. I was wondering if you might check back in Featured article review/History of Limerick. Any plans to still work on it? If not, no worries. Just let us know. Marskell (talk) 08:59, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I've replied to your query
...on my talk page, but perhaps there's something you could help me with. At the bottom of Lord High Treasurer of Ireland, you can see a list of commissioners of that office, taken from Haydn's Book of Dignities. Unfortunately, the list is clearly defective; there is no "George, Earl of Ross" who can be identified with that period, for instance. The commissions do not appear to have ever been Gazetted; do you know of any better source for these commissioners? Choess (talk) 00:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Philatelic categories
Hello. I'm afraid I can't recall the whys and wherefores but the two categories do look the same so I would go ahead and merge. Best wishes. BlackJack | talk page 05:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * On this same subject of similar categories, I'm sure this has been discussed in the past but can you remind me why it was decided to have separate categories Category:Postage stamps by country and Category:Postal history by country?
 * I just did a quick comparison and found that 154 articles are common to both categories. There are these eight in Category:Postage stamps by country that are not in the latter:
 * Airmail stamps of Denmark
 * Coins and postage stamps of Sealand
 * Definitive postage stamps of Ireland
 * Japanese post in Korea
 * List of Malaysian stamps
 * List of postage stamps of Pakistan
 * Postage stamps of Ireland
 * Postage stamps of Vietnam
 * and then there are these 18 that are in the latter only:
 * Indian Postal Service
 * Japanese post in Korea
 * List of Ottoman post offices in Palestine
 * List of Ottoman postal rates in Palestine
 * List of post offices in the British Mandate of Palestine
 * List of postal rates in the British Mandate of Palestine
 * Postage stamps and postal history of Australia
 * Postage stamps and postal history of Canada
 * Postage stamps and postal history of Great Britain
 * Postage stamps and postal history of India
 * Postage stamps and postal history of Mauritius
 * Postage stamps and postal history of South Moluccas
 * Postage stamps and postal history of the Confederate States
 * Postage stamps and postal history of the Indian states
 * Postage stamps and postal history of the United States
 * Postage stamps of Australian Antarctic Territory
 * Regional postage in Great Britain
 * South Australian stamp overprints
 * Obviously, some of these will have been miscategorised: for example, I think Indian Postal Service should not be here as it is an organisation. BlackJack | talk page 06:20, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I seem to recall that because some articles were only about stamps and not about postal history of a country and visa versa was the reasoning, however if someone makes a good case to merge into a category that included both I would not be an objector to that proposal. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 14:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Dunlavin sources
I note your concern about the source I quoted on the Dunlavin page. When I read the "blog", it seemed to me to be researched (sources are mentioned although not formally cited) and the author, Chris Lawlor, rang no alarm bells as having axes to grind; just an interested amateur historian whose efforts warrant a wider audience and scrutiny. I intended to use "facts" not interpretations. Having read the verifiability policy it seems that my approach (using the best available sources and comparing them) is flawed (although the "blog" is more of a personal website). I am left with the problem that many web based sources can be similarly ruled out, despite the fact that it can be difficult to obtain a comparable level of detail. Others are clearly in the same boat, since the "RailScot" site cited also appears to be a personal website. Folks at 137 (talk) 09:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It is a tricky path to walk but these days we are trying to provide verifiable sources for articles despite this not having being a requirement in the past. With that in mind certain sources are regarded, according to guidelines, as unreliable even when you consider then reliable. It's a hard situation when you can't find any other source. Did you try searching for any PD books at: Google books? ww2censor (talk) 13:48, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oooh! Didn't know about Google Books. I assume that "PD"=public domain and that Google Books excludes anything else? Or are they marked up for tyros like me? Looks like pursuing the Dunlavin thing will have a benefit. Cheers. Folks at 137 (talk) 13:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Google books cover a wide range of material both old PD and new copyright books but you may be able to source the info you need in some of them. I find it best to limit my view to "full and limited view" as "snippet view" cannot be regarded as reliable. On the other hand you may find books that you can then reference in a library. Hope that helps. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 14:03, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:Official names
I congratulate you on having successfully cut and pasted an official list. But it is not our policy to copy such lists; it would be closer to say that it wasn't; that adds no information that an external link would not have provided. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:34, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Please understand you as the second person plural, if it is more accurate. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:11, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? ww2censor (talk) 18:34, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * This perceived accusation, which I did not intend. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, so I misunderstood the words you wrote. I usually take what people write literally as they seemed to suggest I was completely responsible for posting the list of UPU members to the article. I appreciate your clarification. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 01:28, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

user page post
i did not vandalse no ones page was just responding back to what that person wrote on my page. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ford1206 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Did you know (Donegal Corridor)
Thanks for the suggestion. I didn't know about this so I've "nominated" as much to try it out as with serious expectation of success. Thanks for the thought: slightly chuffed that you thought it was worth it. Folks at 137 (talk) 17:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Saw your comment "Format nomed article and add some wikilinks for clarity." What are your particular concerns? Folks at 137 (talk) 21:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I reformatted the article name in bold text which is how the DYK identifies the article nominated. I added some wikilinks to "Allies" and "Irish neutrality". ww2censor (talk) 21:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Michael Stapleton
I think I explained, in some detail, the last time you posed this question, exactly why that "source" for Michael Stapleton no longer applies. I'm not going to repeat myself, except to say that Michael Stapleton was long dead before the work attributed to him in Dennis's book was carried out, and it was carried out by his son, George. Please refer to my edits of the "Chapel Royal".Hohenloh (talk) 15:40, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Please see the first "Michael Stapleton" section on my talk page.Hohenloh (talk) 15:45, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't recall you telling me anything about that. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 23:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Using AutoBlog for WP:AUTOS articles
Hi ww2censor, I saw your note on the Genesis page about using blogs as sources -- or not, as I am well aware that blogs are discouraged in general, and I fully support the guideline. In the case of AutoBlog, however, I understand that it has an editorial structure (similar to its sister site Engadget) which makes it more like a traditional news source than a blog, and is considered an important industry source. Additionally, they prominently display a corrections form, which indicates that they value accuracy. Thoughts? NMS Bill (talk) 17:10, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Flags
re Note that WP:MOSFLAG (not WP:FLAG incidentally) only specifically deprecates flags in infoboxes for place of birth and death, it's generally being held that using them for something like the allegiance of a military figure, and the specific service to which they belonged can be a useful usage, see MILMOS. David Underdown (talk) 11:34, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * If that is your interpretation, go with it but I do not read it like that. ww2censor (talk) 13:12, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * "Flag images, especially flag icons in biographical infoboxes, should not be used to indicate birth or death places, as this may imply an incorrect citizenship or nationality." from WP:MOSFLAG. "When dealing with biographical infobox templates, the most common practice is to use flag icons to indicate allegiance or branch of service, but not place of birth or death. However, there remains considerable disagreement regarding the appropriateness of flags in such cases, so editors should not regard this as a universal rule." from MILMOS (though the second sentence of this does leave some wriggle room, I'll grant you. The use for allegiance and branch of service is similar to that for sportspeople to indicate which nation they have represented in international competition, it is verifiable, and not subjective, and in the military infobox it is always followed by the country name, or service name, so there isn't an accessibility issue.  David Underdown (talk) 13:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll keep that in mind for non-birth and death date flag usage. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

3RR
Hello there. While I accept I am close to breaking 3RR, I have not done so yet - as you stated in this edit. I don't want to be a dick here, but I just felt that, when combined with your template on my talk, it was a bit rude. Again, I don't want to be a dick, and I don't expect an apology, I'm just saying is all. Thanks! Fin©™ 15:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * If you think my actions rude, then so be it but I am correct. If I had made a mistake I would apologise but as already answered on the COI noticeboard this clearly indicates you have already breached 3RR for Corrib gas project though on Shell to Sea only Lapsed Pacifist has breached 3RR however you are getting close on that too. It is just to remind you guys to step back a bit. Not being an admin I cannot block either of you for your actions even if I wanted to. ww2censor (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've replied on the COI noticeboard, with evidence that I haven't, so I think you are mistaken. Thanks! Fin©™ 16:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I just checked the Shell to Sea history - you stated that LP has breached 3RR on it. That's incorrect (he's made three reversions), the WP:3RR states "Contributors must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period". I think this is where the confusion was. Thanks! Fin©™ 16:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Stamps.
Ww2Censor:

I had recently stumbled across the Commons image of someone's Argentine postage stamp collection and, though the Flickr uploader should've probably scanned the stamps individually, I thought it might be a nice touch

I edited out a couple of typos (accents and the like) and added a reference where the original editor had overlooked. You seem to be a knowledgeable stamp collector; is it bad form to put up an image of multiple stamps? If so, I'll leave it alone; otherwise, I'm sure the image would be informative to those who had never seen Argentine postage and evocative to Argentines who might recall a fond memory or two.

I look forward to your thoughts.

Sincerely, 76.174.124.198 (talk) 22:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * In your edit to Postage stamps and postal history of Argentina I don't see any typo correction or any reference being added. What I saw was moving around some of the images away from the text that was associated with them and the addition of an image containing stamps that are not in the Public Domain which means it will likely be deleted. Besides which the image does not add any significant understanding to the subject and even as such might be better suited to the stockbook article. WP:IMAGE states: Images must be relevant to the article they appear in and be significantly relative to the article's topic. and, besides not being completely PD, I think the image you added does not comply with that guideline. If you disagree please convince me otherwise because your justification does not seem very encyclopaedic. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 02:31, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Ww2Censor:


 * Thank you for your reply. I indeed did make a couple of small corrections (possibly from another IP address). No matter, though: stamps are not my forté and are, as I noted, of mainly sentimental interest to me.  I don't doubt that you've had past edits - sometimes even inspired ones - that you've had to defend against devil's advocates and malicious second-guessing.  God knows I have, too, so you'll get none of that from me.  It's clear that you have an excellent grasp of the subject matter.


 * Could you please see about uploading more Argentine and Uruguayan stamps into the Commons sometime? They really don't have a good selection and I'd be grateful.


 * Thanks again.


 * Sincerely, 76.174.124.198 (talk) 03:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I will have a look for some Argentina stamps but as such I actually don't collect stamps and any I am likely to have will not be PD, so will not be permitted on the Commons and my postal history collecting is mainly from WWII, so even if I have some those too will not be more than 70-years old but I will ask another editor if he has some. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 04:23, 3 October 2008 (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 (talk) 03:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Cut to shape
Response for you on my talk page. --Non-dropframe (talk) 00:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Flag of Ireland
Having read over [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland#Flag_of_Ireland_2 the discussion] on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland on the recent move and the concerns expressed, I have begun a move request on the flag. Your comments would be welcome here.-- Domer48 'fenian'  19:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Kashmir
Like in pakistani mountains it states disputed it should also say this on indian mountains unless you want me to remove the indian claims from pakistani mountains you should accept that indian mountains are also disputed81.151.100.255 (talk) 21:56, 25 October 2008 (UTC) Also in k6 it clearly states it is disputed it should say the same on other indian mountains like nun kun why do you have POV against pakistan ??81.151.100.255 (talk) 21:59, 25 October 2008 (UTC) i await your response with patience then 81.151.100.255 (talk) 22:06, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Samantha Smith
Most articles just have the dates in brackets not the places - for example Franklin D. Roosevelt. Paul Austin (talk) 16:50, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * So, is there a guideline or policy for that? If so, perhaps you would use the edit summary to let other editors know what and why. ww2censor (talk) 18:03, 30 October 2008 (UTC)