User talk:Agent1135
This needs some input from people who were around in the 1970's and remember the practical problems of implementing the new Act after 1973. Also interested in hearing from anyone who can give an account of the early days of enforcement in the 70's.
Talkback
[edit]
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- Agent1135 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
- 212.137.36.228 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Hectorthebat". The reason given for Hectorthebat's block is: "Repeating behaviour that led to previous block".
- Blocking administrator: PeterSymonds (talk • blocks)
Decline reason: The block on the IP has apparently been lifted because of "odd stuff going on" (I know NOTHING. Seriously). If you still can't edit, what message are you getting when you try? — Daniel Case (talk) 15:16, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Agent1135 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
- 212.137.36.229 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Hectorthebat". The reason given for Hectorthebat's block is: "Repeating behaviour that led to previous block".
- Blocking administrator: PeterSymonds (talk • blocks)
Accept reason: Try now, cleared the autoblock. Alexandria (talk) 16:57, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
The autoblock has been applied appearently because someone within a large network has acted inappropriately but the network in question has about 20,000 people on it. There must be a lot of people blocked. I have nothing against my history. Agent1135
You can go ahead and remove the tags yourself if you like - no need to ask permission! Excellent work you've done on the article, thank you very much. It could do with a little bit of tidying up, so I'll re-tag it for that, but otherwise - thank you! ninety:one (reply on my talk) 19:41, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks so much. It is still work in progress having only got as far as 1973! Agent1135 (talk) 19:47, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Well done for all the expansion you've made. When it comes to adding links you can save yourself a lot of typing. I suspect you're copying (part of) the url to create the link which includes the underscores so then you're adding the pipe and the text without underscores. Instead copy the article name from the top of the page and bingo link in one. NtheP (talk) 17:04, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Image tagging for File:Einstein-immigration-stamp.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Einstein-immigration-stamp.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:06, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Image tagging for File:William Haldane-Porter.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:William Haldane-Porter.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:06, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Image source problem with File:UK Immigration Service warrant badge.jpg
[edit]
Thank you for uploading File:UK Immigration Service warrant badge.jpg.
This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.
If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. 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 Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:38, 4 December 2011 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:38, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
[edit]Hi. When you recently edited Sir William Haldane-Porter, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Queen’s College and Order of Leopold (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:30, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
I noticed you added the references: "Porter family archive - unpublished". Can you explain that to me? I'm a bit confused as to what you are saying. The reference is from papers no one has read? Dennis Brown (talk) 00:01, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
It is research taken from face to face contact with Porter's surviving grand-daughter. Not sure how to otherwise describe it.
- That is a problem. That is specifically what WP:OR says we can't include, original research. If it isn't published by a third party (or second best, taken from the documents themselves if they were published), then we can't publish it here. This would make you, in essence, the "reporter" (second party) instead of encyclopedia (tertiary party), which is what we are. I had a feeling that is what it was, but didn't want to jump to conclusions. I'm not jumping to start tagging and deleting stuff yet, but you *really* need to get the advice of an experienced admin who can help you determine what should and shouldn't stay. I would much rather have you get help on it and trim it yourself than have me or someone else try to do it. But the policies are brutally clear on this type of stuff. Again, talk to an admin about it before someone starts trimming on their own. If you don't know one, there is one I can recommend for this type of issue, User:DGG. He doesn't seem to care for me personally, but he is a professional librarian (and other things, and has a physics degree, smart guy) and I know you can trust his opinions on what can and can't stay. He may have other ideas that I haven't thought of as well, who knows. I'm hoping this is something that you can get started on in the next few days, as the article seems to be worthwhile. Dennis Brown (talk) 00:59, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- Dennis asked me to tak a look at this, and I will, over the next day or two. I agree with him that the subject is clearly notable and the article worth hre trouble. In general, the more good sources the better the article--so see what additional you can find, from published books or journals. DGG ( talk ) 00:13, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
- I've looked at it and examined the style. It is pretty obvious to be that it is a fairly direct copy from a published source, probably the book you used as the essentially sole reference. It's not written like an encyclopedia article. I cite just a few very improbably sentences "It is indeed sad therefore in the circumstances that Sir William now lies in all but total forgotten overgrown obscurity," ".He was a unique,irreplaceable,revered,respected ,honoured and honourable gentleman" "Rev Porter hailed from yeoman Scottish settler stock with family lands overlooking Lough Swilly at Burt in county Donegal." And some of them are judgments: judgements need to be supported by exactly whose judgement they are, and need in-line citations. "a tall commanding figure with a moustache,much resembling his father" "brought about properly focused application to an ongoing national problem hitherto inadequately addressed " "It was an open secret that he had been offered more than once important posts outside the service."
- When you do give an exact quoted source, the material is inappropriately detailed, such as the section on his marriage. Other overly detailed sections are those on his ancestors. For people who are not truly famous, not merely notable as he was, we say who their parents are and leave it at that. We do not go to the extent of describing the burial monuments of their siblings.
- There are two courses i could take at this point. The easiest, though not the fastest is to get the book at one of next trips to my university library in a few weeks. The other is to reduce the material to what is the usual length of a Wikipedia article, and to assume that everything needs rewriting to avoid what is certainly either copyvio or Close paraphrase.
- But the best solution would be for you yourself to do this. Are you still around? I'll be glad to respond to questions, but ask me at my talk p. where I'll be sure to see them. DGG ( talk ) 22:56, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:1940 refusal register combine.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:1940 refusal register combine.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:42, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Agent1135. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Sir William Haldane-Porter.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Sir William Haldane-Porter.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:33, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
