Jump to content

User talk:Bjmullan/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


CIL

[edit]

Hope u don't mind - he won't stop until he sees roi. Anyway funding is liable to change. - ClemMcGann (talk) 21:29, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But it hasn't changed yet! And does CIL own the ports - no! They are Republic of Ireland ports, to differentiate them from those of Northern Ireland. Clem, you seem like another POV warrior intent on not having Republic of Ireland here. I'm reverting your latest change, so please come up with some arguments in favour of your version. Hrotovice (talk) 21:36, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
with respect, CIL provides the lights - not the RoI. CIL is an all-island body. Even at the height of the troubles, CIL went unmolested. You deleted my cite supporting "an annual contribution from the Irish Government towards the cost of the service provided by the Commissioners in the Republic of Ireland." - you removed my cite for RoI! - and claim that I am "another POV warrior intent on not having Republic of Ireland here"Please desist. - ClemMcGann (talk) 22:13, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I've point out in Hrotovice talk page the ports covered by CIL are for the whole or Ireland and therefore using ROI is inappropriate. I have also warn him about his reverting. Bjmullan (talk) 20:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
wait - another awkward insertion of RoI ClemMcGann (talk) 20:43, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
a further consideration is that, with modern technology, large ships no longer depend on lighthouses. So the sentence is wrong, anyway. There were proposals that lesiure craft should have to pay. Now that labour are out, it remains to be seen what happens to that pproposal. Strictly speaking, the reason why CIL gets cash from Trinity House is that it was a provision of the Anglo-Irish treaty - ClemMcGann (talk) 23:55, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Silverstone Circuit

[edit]

I have no doubt you're right about the length of the Stowe circuit, I just copied from the list on the right. I'm now reluctant to change the list on the right as someone is wrong and I don't want to make matters worse! If you're confident about the circuit length, I point you to the list on the right of the page... —Preceding unsigned comment added by217.37.152.42 (talk) 13:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WPF1 Newsletter (June)

[edit]

– Cs-wolves(talk) 18:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Avalon

[edit]

Response at my talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added bySpongerJack (talk • contribs) 22:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation: Israel and the Apartheid analogy

[edit]

Just an FYI, we are running a straw poll on title choices on the mediation page -seeWikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2010-04-14/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analogy#Straw_poll_on_titles. If you pitch in a vote or three, we can move this along. --Ludwigs2 06:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a reminder: you have not yet voted on the straw poll. If you don't, your voice will not be heard on this issue, which would be sad. . --Ludwigs2 06:25, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Londonderry/Derry

[edit]

OK, so the MOS says use Derry for the city and Londonderry for the county, but it doesn't say that either term has to be replaced with the agreed version throughout the encyclopedia. You seem to be engaging in - shall we say - a systematic replacement of Londonderry with Derry. In the light of what's happened with British Isles I would suggest this is perhaps not a good idea. The replacements add nothing and can't even be argued as being right or wrong. LevenBoy (talk) 19:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst i disagree with the compromise on the Londonderry/Derry issue, as it is in the MOS i see no problem with those being changed to ensure the text use is inline with the MOS to avoid different usage which would cause more confusion. It would be a far more justified mission than the crusade to remove British Isles from wikipedia. BritishWatcher (talk) 21:21, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I

[edit]

You have been reported to AN/I for disruptive behavior regarding replacing Londonderry with Derry at McKownville, New York, and it seems at least one other editor warned you that this is behavior that may not be acceptable.Camelbinky (talk) 00:00, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 2010

[edit]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did here: Wikipedia:Ani. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Toddst1(talk) 15:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WPF1 Newsletter (July)

[edit]

– Cs-wolves(talk) 22:42, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Dunlop

[edit]

Hi, looks good. Maybe you should consider including the race times as well(?). —Precedingunsigned comment added by Nigel jewell (talk •contribs) 20:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the discussion. It was agreed.

[edit]

Look at the discussion. It was agreed. --Triton Rocker (talk) 07:55, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just added 16 good references to one topic. What did you do?

[edit]

I just added 16 good references to one topic alone and a load of tidy up. What did you do? --Triton Rocker (talk) 08:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll tell you what I didn't do....move one more step closer to a bigger ban for violating the British Isles topic ban. BTW redirecting your talk page to your homepage is just childish. Bjmullan (talk) 08:27, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Accidental blanking

[edit]

This edit blanked a lot of the noticeboard... I just reverted. Do you want to do the repairs to restore the newer content? BE——Critical__Talk 19:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that Critical. That is the second time the something funny has happened while editing from an iPhone. Note too self stop editing from the iPhone! Bjmullan (talk) 20:38, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on closure of Israel and Aparthied mediation

[edit]

Current consensus seems to be to move the article to Israel and Apartheid with an appropriate disambiguation line to prevent any misinterpretations. Please weigh in over the next few days. --Ludwigs2 17:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

[edit]

Thank you. If I need any more advice from you, I will come and ask.

I do not wish to burden you any more. I will thank you for leaving my talk page alone now. --Triton Rocker (talk) 15:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not worries, advice costs nothing. Have a good weekend and chill ;-) Bjmullan (talk) 15:35, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WT:BISE

[edit]

I have [1] a comment you posted. TFOWR 14:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After LM comment I was about to change it but you got to it first. I did not intend my comment to be an attack on TR and will ensure that in the future I am more careful. Thanks. Bjmullan (talk) 14:15, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Czech Rally

[edit]

Compliments to you! It's not very often that I see new articles like 2010 Czech Rally. So nice job on that. I went ahead and tagged it as under construction. Is that alright? Endofskull (talk) 21:20, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That was quick! Yes it's OK. I will remove it when the (hidden) stage info is complete. Thanks for the compliment :-)Bjmullan(talk) 21:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Do you need any help on the article? Endofskull (talk) 21:36, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the offer but it will get done by me and probably Cs-wolves. Bjmullan (talk) 21:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cs-wolves he's at it already! He is so quick :-) Bjmullan (talk) 21:41, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. If you need any help, just come to me! Endofskull (talk) 01:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Channel Islands

[edit]
TR maybe you could explain to me (I think you said you did study geography) how the channel islands are geographically connected to Great Britian/Ireland/BI and not to France? When I look at the map all I see are small French islands but they always seem to be part of the "geographic" BI's. Bjmullan (talk) 18:46, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You could try starting with looking at the disciplines of Human geography and their defining nature. There are a number of specifically related books and articles around, e.g. 'Human Geography of the UK: an Introduction' by Hardill, Graham & Kofman. It briefly touches on the changing references to the term British Isles. Geography is not all about land.

As far as the Channel Islands go. I understand what you are saying. They should be French. They are also part of Normandy culturally, geographically and historically. But they are British Isles now. You have to blame a long chain of individuals from the Normans to loyalist families like the De Carterets during the Wars of the Roses. Bear in mind that until 1801, French territories were under English rule, and the interconnectedness of English, French and Norman aristocracies. And don't mention Chausey.

If you are genuinely interested, I would also read up on the creation of national identities, how and when they happens. What has happened in Ireland and Scotland is the creation of a collective identity where they was none one before, based on a romantic notions and geography rather than say tribe, religion or class, in which the dominant "England" is used as a defining other. This actually makes Irishness subject to Britishness (by which you really mean Englishness).

That is not positive and it belongs to the politics of the last century. It has gone as far as it will get and it would be far better for Ireland to define itself based on its position and relationships within Europe. The way to beat "Britishness" (meaning Englishness) is not to dig a trench of "Irishness", that fight is won as much as it can be, but to enjoin and promote Europeanness. To reject and bury Little England under Europe.

As it is, the UK is become less and less British anyway. Give it 50 years and, by the demographics, if you don't change you will be defining yourself by hating an Islamic state instead. It will be Catholicism versus The Caliphate of Westminister! --Triton Rocker (talk) 03:27, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WRC driver

[edit]

Did you know, Who is that American rally driver debuted on 1995, can you guess that driver?

Here is an external link: [2]

--Videogamer13(talk). September 1, 2010 (UTC).

My favourite rally drivers is United StatesJonas Andromeda, SpainCarlos Sainz, FinlandJuha Kankkunen,FranceSebastien Loeb and FinlandMikko Hirvonen. And what's your favourite rally drivers?--Videogamer13(talk). 19:48, September 4, 2010 (UTC).

In order: Scotland Colin Mcrae, Finland Markku Alén, Germany Walter Röhrl and Finland Juha Kankkunen. I have been fortunate to have seen all of these drivers in action. I hope to see Loeb and Hirvonen later in the year for the first time.Bjmullan (talk) 22:44, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? Finland Henri Toivonen, Scotland Colin McRae and England Richard Burns is the deceased rally driver. I see Toivonen's death by a fatal crash during rally in 1986 and McRae's death by a helicopter accident. --Gtabigfan2010 (talk) 10:00, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WPF1 Newsletter (August)

[edit]

– Cs-wolves(talk) 15:08, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arguments for inclusion of the term "British Isles"

[edit]

Just thought I should let you know, you added your reason for non-inclusion to the "Arguments for inclusion" subsection as well as the "Arguments against inclusion" one. Scolaire (talk) 18:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Scolaire it should have been in the UK section. Now moved. Bjmullan (talk) 07:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Favourite F1 Drivers

[edit]

My favourite F1 driver is GermanyMichael Schumacher. And what's your favourite F1 driver? --Videogamer13 (talk) 03:37, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

[edit]

BJ, thanks for your comment here. --RA (talk) 08:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jonas Andromeda is the American rally driver. Did you recognize him? --Gtabigfan2010 (talk) 09:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1/rr

[edit]

Editors are currently restricted to 1 revert within a 24 hour period at Gaza War. Your reverts are based on talk page discussion and appear to me to be justified but it is still crossing the line technically. You and the other editor should probably self revert your last ones.Cptnono(talk) 10:04, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I misread the edit history and the other editor technically did not revert. It was still bad form and he should have used the talk page before tagging and then should have waited for a response instead of reverting. Oh well. So although you were fully using the talk page that second revert was against the rules so if you didn't know here is your friendly reminder. You can;t self revert since he already reverted. D'oh.Cptnono(talk) 10:19, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I saw that and I have no intentions breaking the rule. Let's hope we can get Marokwitz consensus on the lede as well.Bjmullan(talk) 10:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppetry case

[edit]

Hello, Bjmullan! While you're certainly not a suspect, your name has been mentioned in a sock puppetry case. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LevenBoy for more. Thank you :> Doc9871 (talk) 13:54, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stansty

[edit]

Your reference for Archdeacon of Derry states: 166J. Jonathan Edwards, LL. D. a Prebendary of Kilkenny, and Chancellor of Ferns, was installed on February 16. (ff.) He appears in 1679; but I have not learned when he ceased to be Archdeacon. This does not mention Derry but I note it's within a section with a title of "Derry". At the risk of being accused of policy shopping, to claim this referecne supports Archdeacon of Derry is WP:SYN. There are references for Londonderry and for Derry. I suggest you get expert advice on the title he acquired at installation. I'll leave it a couple of days then revert if no definitive reference or expert advice is forthcoming. LevenBoy (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could supply the references you talk about at either the talk page of the article of Stansty or at Jonathan Edwards (archdeacon). Please do not remove reference material, take it to the talk page of the article. Removal of reference material can be consider as vandalism.Bjmullan (talk) 20:04, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Only if the reference is actually a reference. Yours isn't, in that it does not support the point you're making.LevenBoy(talk) 21:08, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's for debate at the talk pages above. Please take your discuss there. Thank you. Bjmullan (talk) 21:11, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You mean like you did? No, you have made a change, I applied WP:BRD and you then edit warred to put it back without discussion. You should have proposed the reference at Talk where its inadequacies or otherwise could have been discussed. Now the onus is on you to provide a suitable reference. I will revert it in two days time if you don't come up with anything - so start looking! LevenBoy (talk) 22:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For the LAST time take this to the talk page of the articles. I have included a reference (as requested), if you are unsure of the diocese where he was an archdeacon I suggest you try page 307 of the book, it's title is "Diocese of Derry" and scroll from there to page 337 (or do you consider scrolling SYN?). The whole book is a list of Bishops/Deans/Archdeacons/etc for all the the diocese of Ulster. If you to not agree with the reference then provide another one at the talk page. I will not be answering any further comments on this subject here. Thank you and good night.Bjmullan (talk) 22:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Need help from WRCPedia

[edit]

Bjmullan, The admins and editors needs some help for improving the pages on WRC Wiki (WRCPedia), if you want to improve the WRC Pedia, go towrc.wikia.com. --Gtabigfan2010 (talk) 18:07, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 2012 Intercontinental Rally Challenge season

[edit]

A tag has been placed on 2012 Intercontinental Rally Challenge season requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Pleasesee the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note onthe talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged forspeedydeletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Seduisant (talk) 21:09, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine Seduisant. It was created by mistake (should have been 2011). Nearly added that tag myself. Bjmullan (talk) 21:15, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:IRC

[edit]

Ah, I was out earlier thus didn't see your message until now. Unfortunately not, as much as I would like to go. :( Cs-wolves(talk) 21:38, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I hope to make it and I hope the weather is better than last year! Might also make Rally Wales GB. Bjmullan (talk) 21:42, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Trust me, if the weather is anything like tonight...jackets are a must. Hooded ones. Cs-wolves(talk) 21:51, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WPF1 Newsletter (September)

[edit]

--Midgrid(talk) 19:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1991 Tooheys 1000

[edit]

2:14.5 is the current lap record? They've been racing in 2:08's at Bathurst for several years, I'll be re-writing that bit.--Falcadore (talk) 20:29, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are so right. Miss read the data! 2:08.4651 is the record but the race record still stands. BTW Wish I could be there!Bjmullan(talk) 20:33, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Me2. Got a nice party to head off to... very shortly! Update the Aus GTs will have to wait until tonight. Much rather be there, much rather be working down there. --Falcadore (talk) 20:58, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's always the same. You put something up that has stood for 19 years and it gets broken the next day! Bjmullan (talk) 20:32, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

British Isles Terminology task force

[edit]

There are no problems for me about your rollbacks, sorry if it caused problems to this project. I've transcluded this navbox (not the category) on that 2 articles (Pr. of Wales -here- and Irish Free State -here-) because i've found them still listed (not by me) on the navbox. I hope that this misunderstanding was cleared because in my work I always search to avoid to include articles into too much general categories, searching for specific subcategories. Greetings. --Dэя-Бøяg 01:20, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:60k

[edit]

Thanks for those erm...reassuring words! It gets worse when you look at the month-by-month edit graph. :( Cs-wolves(talk) 18:01, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only 2,000 in a month. Calming down, ever so slowly! Ah yes, remember to take a jacket! Haha! Cs-wolves(talk) 18:19, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oasis reverted edits

[edit]

Hey Bjmullan. When reverting an edit, please also warn (or notify) the user you reverted, especially in this article, which is controversial (seenotice (and ban). Cheers - CETTALK 08:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will do and thanks. Bjmullan (talk) 09:04, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BISE stuff

[edit]

Such comments by hot-headed editors (like TR or Mick) simple don't phaze me. I'm a tad concerned though, about the possibilty that you've replacedBritish Isles in an article, without bringing it to BISE first. GoodDay (talk) 14:25, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GoodDay what are you actually trying to achieve with you recent comments on the pages of TFWOR and TR? Mo ainm~Talk 14:31, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to sort out their differences. GoodDay (talk) 14:32, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How by saying ah sure the comments weren't bad? So long as editors feel they can comment on other editors instead of the issues then nothing will be done. Mo ainm~Talk 14:38, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just pointing out, that TR, LB & LM (for example) have rarely posted negative things at me. Why? coz, that can't get under my skin.GoodDay (talk) 14:43, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

British Sky Broadcasting

[edit]

Some information for interested parties regarding my involvement at the article BSkyB

1. Contrary to the beliefs of some editors on Wikipedia, who may or may not be restricted themselves, I am under no restrictions regarding the addition/removal of the term “British Isles”.

The General sanctions at the British Isles Probation Log states... Any editor who systematically adds or removes the term "British Isles" from multiple articles without clear sourcing and justification, or who edit-wars over such addition or removal, may be added to the list of topic-banned editors. I have not been added to this list.

2. Immediately after making my edit at BSkyB I notified WP:BISE with a clear summary of the reason for my edit. Edithere and the notification to BISE two minutes later here

3. To use the term UK + I instead of BI is not an erroneous error but a statement that can be backed up by references from the Sky Corporate website. To claim otherwise is just an attempt to stir up controversy over a legitimate edit. Seehere. [3],here, [4],here, [5],here ...

I hope this helps to clear up any misunderstandings. Bjmullan (talk) 20:55, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought we were suppose to propose such additions/deletions at BISE first. That's why I haven't been making any additions or deletions.GoodDay (talk) 20:58, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps GoodDay you could provide a diff for this thought as I am unaware of it. BTW I hope the move is going/went ok!Bjmullan(talk) 22:50, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've no diffs (that I can think of). Anyways, no probs. GoodDay (talk) 23:02, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WPF1 Newsletter (October)

[edit]

– Cs-wolves(talk) 18:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Giants Causeway

[edit]

Hi Bjmullan, I couldnt find the discussion on Northern Ireland is/not a Country? Can you tell me where it is? Also, why should the Giants Causeway page be different from every other page relating to Northern Ireland?Factocop (talk) 16:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For your first question try here for your second try reading the thread at the article. Now can you please go and ask other people questions. As I pointed out earlier I am not here to answer your questions. Bjmullan (talk) 17:41, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK thanks for the link. Could of done that in the first place. Would of caused less agro. as for your 2nd point. I have read the thread but in typical fashion you refuse to answer my question. I am not asking why you think Northern Ireland is not a country, I am asking you why YOU think this page should have a different location to every other Northern Ireland related page? Do you understand? Do you have an answer, yes or no? there is no shame if you cant answer the question. It only highlights your lack of a point.Factocop (talk) 18:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The very simple reason is that in the case of the Giants Causeway it is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Bjmullan (talk) 18:10, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And what is your point?Factocop (talk) 09:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Given that the template is a geobox and not a UNESCO template, the page will be changed to reflect all other Northern Ireland related pages. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGiant27s_Causeway&action=historysubmit&diff=267427593&oldid=259262986.Thankyou.Factocop (talk) 11:00, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lane discipline

[edit]

I have made it clear that I have no intention of turning the policy discussion at WP:VERIFY into yet another British Isles renaming dispute.

If you would like to remove your comments to the RFC on the use of the term British Isles, I will answer it there otherwise, if you do not give me permission to remove it, I will ignore it.

Thanks but we need to have some lane discipline. --LevenBoy (talk) 03:38, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may have sought my permission to move my comments but you did not get it but you still went ahead with the move. Please do not remove any of my comments. Thank you. Bjmullan (talk) 08:34, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Plastic bullet

[edit]

There's not even an attempt at a non-free use rationale. Whether the image is being discussed somewhere or not, it unambiguously fails our non-free content criteria. Please do not add it back. J Milburn (talk) 11:43, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have just broken the 1RR and I will report you for this. Bjmullan (talk) 12:07, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what you're talking about. The image unambiguously fails our non-free content criteria- you cannot edit war to keep an image for which no rationale is provided in an article, whether you're discussing it somewhere or not (and I was not aware of any discussion at the time). I am removing the image again- if you continue to force the image into the article while it fails the NFCC, you will be blocked. Whether you like them or not, the NFCC are as much a policy as anything else. J Milburn (talk) 12:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two things to be aware of. The use of this image is currently being discussed hereandhere. You have not participated in either discussion and the validity of the image has not yet been settled. You reverts could be considering warring. Secondly this article is be part ofThe Troubles and as such falls under the strict 1RR rule which you have broken. Just for information when you are not sure if an article does fall under the 1RR then you should err on the side of caution. I see that you have reverted again after I have pointed this out. Bjmullan(talk) 12:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion is nice, but it doesn't change the fact it fails the NFCC, as has been explained. No amount of sophistry can get around that, and while it does, it cannot be used in the article, and any edit placing it in the article is downright disruptive. (There's no notice about any 1RR on the talk page or the edit notice or anything, I don't know how you expect people to know. I haven't read the article, I assumed it was about, y'know, bullets.)J Milburn (talk) 13:08, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well now you do know. Any article the can be considered about the Trouble is under a strict 1RR and as I said above when in doubt err on the side of caution. Also for your information just because I call you or another one else for that matter "guy" doesn't mean I'm treating you or anyone else like shit. You have a nice day and chill. Bjmullan (talk) 13:18, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WPF1 Newsletter (November)

[edit]

--Midgrid(talk) 00:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Your removed my link but not the others which fall into the same area —Precedingunsigned comment added by 67.101.66.2 (talk) 23:01, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All gone. Bjmullan (talk) 00:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/MickMacNee

[edit]

FYI, I've added a couple sentences to my outside view, which you endorsed. You may wish to review it to ensure you're still fine with my comments.  RGTraynor  01:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Your additions are fine. Bjmullan (talk) 11:59, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Places of birth

[edit]

For consistency the first paragraph has been moved from the talk page of user:SE7:

I have noticed that you have been doing a mass update of peoples place of birth which is most cases is not required (overlinking) or just down right incorrect. As an example Birkenhead is not in Cheshire it is in Merseyside. Also when you revert someone's edit can you please give a reason in the edit summary and not use the minor tag in this cases. If you are unsure of when to use the minor tag I suggest you readWP:Minor.Bjmullan (talk) 22:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Was Oscar Wilde born in the Republic of Ireland? Was George Washington born in the United States of America? No, of course not, because neither place existed at the time of those figures' birth. The same is true of someone born before about 1975 and Liverpool, 1965 and London/Middlesex/Essex/Surrey, etc etc.
I take your point that overlinking is undesirable, and therefore recent edits have not linked to the England page. Otherwise I cannot accept your point, as it is incorrect.SE7Talk/Contribs22:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I feel that in the example above that using just Birkenhead, UK or Birkenhead, United Kingdom or Birkenhead, UKwould be preferred rather than introducing a defunct county (which has already confused another editor at Karl McCartney). Also when British politicians are involved I think it is more appropriate to use UK and not England. I do not wish to get into an edit war with you and due to the large number of similar edits you have done I think that it is only correct that we get the input of other editors. To this end I will added a note to both the talk pages of the UK Project and thePolitics of the UK projects. Bjmullan (talk) 11:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's not an issue of "introducing a defunct country"; England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are the four constituent countries of the United Kingdom. Much the same as putting a US state - you wouldn't find US politicians with birth places like "Boston, USA" - nor indeed, would you find a US politician with "USA" in their birth place section on the infobox, because it is obvious unless otherwise stated. As is the case for the UK.SE7Talk/Contribs16:24, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Defunct county not country i.e. Cheshire. Bjmullan (talk) 16:27, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I do beg your pardon. The example of George Washington et al still stands, in so far as Liverpool was in Lancashire unless you were born after 1974, which most MPs from Liverpool weren't. For those after, of course they are from Liverpool, Merseyside, but Merseyside didn't exist before. SE7Talk/Contribs16:51, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why introduce a redundant additional item into the place of birth? Can you answer this question? Liverpool, UK is more than fine as is Birkenhead, UK etc. etc. Let's keep it simple. Liverpool has always been in Liverpool and since 1707 the UK (in one form or another) has also been the UK. Bjmullan (talk) 16:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as before, the "UK" bit is obvious, unless otherwise stated - or British politicians have to have a completely different set of rules to US politicians, who, as previously mentioned, would never have their birthplace referred to as "Cambridge, USA", etc. As for the "Liverpool, UK" rule, what about Kingston? "Kingston, UK" doesn't work, because you could mean the one in Cambridgeshire, the one on the Isle of Wight, the one in Devon, the one in Kent, the one in Hampshire, the one in Dorset, the one on the Isle of Purbeck, the one in West Sussex, the other one in West Sussex, the one in East Sussex, the one in Nottinghamshire, the one in East Lothian, the one in Moray, or the two most (and equally) famous ones,Kingston upon Hull and Kingston upon Thames; you could also mean the Royal Borough which takes its name from the latter of the two. Better not to confuse readers, isn't it? SE7Talk/Contribs17:24, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In the majority of cases using the town/city and then UK is more the enough information. In the cases above they can be easily covers by using there full WP name or common name. e.g. Kingston, Cambridgeshire, UK ; Kingston, Kent, UK ; Hull, UK. I see no reason for any other additional information. I see that user:Cj1340 seems to agree with my point of view and I suggest that you refrain from any addition edits of this type until this matter is resolved. Bjmullan (talk) 19:35, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How and when will this be "resolved"? Or is a two-person consensus sufficient now? You will also have noticed that your "suggestion" was unnecessary as my edits ceased some time ago now. SE7Talk/Contribs19:44, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This as with all disputes on WP will be resolved with consensus (which is not a vote). As it's the Christmas holiday we shouldn't be in any rush to close this. My argument is that your additional bring nothing new to the articles (other than confusion (see Karl McCartney for an example of this)). Your only counter has been to use Kingston as an obscure reason for adding defunct additional address information. May I suggest that you look at the Post Office to see how they address things that can be sent from anywhere in the world and arrive at their destination. You can find ithere.
I think we can also add user:Wereon to the people who disagree with your edits. See their edit summaryhere.Bjmullan(talk) 12:46, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I need clarification: Is the discussion about inclusion/exclusion of counties? GoodDay (talk) 00:01, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GD it's mainly about the addition of redundant or un-necessary address information and also using England when UK is more appropriate. As an example SE7 changed the place of birth of Elizabeth Truss from Oxford to Oxford, Oxfordshire, England. This is not about a single edit but a mass update of over 300 articles by SE7. Bjmullan (talk) 19:12, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My 2c. Always use current placenames, unless the use of a historic or older placename is important within the context of the article in question. So it would be correct to say that Oscar Wilde was born in Dublin, Ireland. Equally correct to say that George Washington was born in Westmoreland County in the Colony of Virginia, and it wouldn't be incorrect to say that Westmoreland County is located in the USA.
I see no reason to record that Karl McCartney was born in "Birkenhead (then Cheshire)" - why is it appropriate to the article?
I don't understand why using "Birkenhead, England" is less appropriate than "Birkenhead, UK" - it's appropriately disambiguated... --HighKing (talk) 21:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
HighKing, are you seriously saying Oscar Wilde was born in the Republic of Ireland? He died before it came about! That's exactly the same as saying Washington, Jefferson, et al were born in the USA - at least they were alive when the US came into existence! SE7Talk/Contribs01:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wilde wasn't born in the RoI but rather the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, if only we had an article of Ireland, when it was a part of the UK 1801 to 1920's, that we could link to. As for Truss? just use England, since the American bios & Canadian bios use states & provinces/territories. GoodDay (talk) 06:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
@SE7, are you seriously saying that you've read what I said above? Oscar Wilde was born in Dublin. Now, unless it is somehow relevant to the article that the name of the country, as it was then, is required in the article to place some fact or attribute in the appropriate context, then I'd leave out the country altogether. For those that need to disambiguate the location in question, I'd disambiguate by using the modern-day name since the disambiguation applies in the context of the location, not the article. Therefore, if you aren't happy with "Dublin" and feel the need to clarify a particular "Dublin", then use "Ireland" as above. Or do what lots of other articles do, and use County Dublin. On the other hand, if it is relevant to the article and content to mention the historical name of the country within an article, go ahead.
@SE7, you appear to be adding address information to articles. I don't see the relevance to the articles in questions, and in my opinion it appears unnecessary. In general, country names are left off articles on historical people as that information is unnecessary. --HighKing(talk) 11:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
HK has just said (in a better way) what I was trying to say. I think that we need to review all of the changes you made and revert those that don't have a particular historical significant to the article (and/or) when there is not disambiguate. Bjmullan (talk) 16:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
@SE7 as you have not responded to this proposal I will take it that you are in broad agreement? When I get a chance I will review the edits you made and if I think appropriate I will revert and add a note to the articles talkpage which will allow you and others to have a input (as per BRD). As we are talking about 300+ articles don't expect this to be fully completed any time soon. Bjmullan (talk) 18:06, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WPF1 Newsletter (December)

[edit]

– Cs-wolves(talk) 18:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

[edit]

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/O Fenian for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 00:22, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yo!

[edit]

How long, in your view, should I wait to see what consensus is on Derry, both in regards to Wikipedia in general and (more importantly, at least to me) on the City Status article? 86.178.52.148 (talk) 19:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you are a brand new editor and that your first edit was at the Irish Manual of Style. Seems a funny place to start editing at Wikipedia. Have you edited here before under a different name or IP address? Wikipedia does not approve of such practices I suggest that you should readWikipedia:Sock puppetry to learn about the guidelines. But then as your first edit was at a MOS you may already be familiar with these. As for your question about how long you should wait ... how long is a piece of string? May I suggest that you considering creating an account if you plan to continue to edit here. Bjmullan (talk) 20:19, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, plenty of times under various IP addresses (but I explain that :p) - not sure what the point is in getting an account to be honest, I can edit fine without. 86.178.52.148 (talk) 20:53, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feargal Sharkey

[edit]

Actually in this case the term "vandalism" was precisely appropriate; see the userpage and the talkpage of this IP vandal, whose prolific abuses have earned the IP (it's in a Belfast library) a one-year block by adminDaniel Case. I am well aware that the issue is contentious. That is why I am concerned when unregistered users make unexplained and uncorroborated changes, violating the fragile balance of consensus. In this case I did not assume good faith for good reason. I followed the rules on WP:DERRY and chastized another editor for going too far as you will see if you review the Sharkey edit history page. Yours,Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 18:57, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conundrum (ROI/NI) re Feargal Sharkey page

[edit]
BJ: I referred to the action as vandalism based on the page's history with anonymous IP users. I will quote some of your fellow Wikipedians (all registered users) from Sharkey's talkpage, as you evidently did not read the message which I left you (above):
  • His nationality must either be described as Northern Irish or British. He is not Irish, as that nationality relates to someone of the Republic of Ireland. I would prefer the location of his birth to state Northern Ireland, but given that he was born on the island of Ireland, I supposed it is not strictly a false statement to make. Tom Green (talk) 10:05, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
  • If IP editor 158.143.181.94 thinks that their version is more accurate then they should explain it. Has Sharkey, for instance, self Identified as Irish rather than Northern Irish? Until they do this their edits are unsupported, and suggest that they are simply opinion. Continually adding them back in against consensus without any attempt to discuss is liable to get IP editor 158.143.181.94 blocked. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 10:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
  • The IP editor 158.143.181.94 continues to change this page (and the Undertones page) without getting involved in any discussion. I'm reverting and it looks like a block might be required. srushe (talk) 16:52, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
BJ: It appears that you are monitoring the Sharkey page but doing nothing when different users change the nationality back and forth. You take offense at the terminology I used ("vandalism") but are doing nothing to positively address this ongoing situation. If I rv anonymous IP edits without using the word "vandalism", is that OK? I mean, with respect, you take offense at the word vandalism but don't care what or how I edit, otherwise? That is not logical. We all know how contentious the ROI/Northern Ireland conundrum is, but you should take a position and defend it, because otherwise the switching of Northern Irish to Irish to Northern Irish back to Irish will continue forever, in all likelihood. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 22:00, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you will respond to this when you are back onwiki (here is fine). Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 22:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WPF1 Newsletter (January)

[edit]

This newsletter is being delivered to you because you signed up to this list. If you wish to stop receiving it, please remove your name.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Formula One at 17:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Targetting articles containing British Isles

[edit]

A significant number of your recent edits have been concerned with articles containing the words "British Isles". You have PRODed some articles, fact tagged others and in some cases carried out straight removal of the term. In the case of Strict Baptist a significant removal of material (including the words "British Isles") has occurred. Since your primary objective would appear to be elimination of the term rather than article improvement your actions could be regarded as gaming the system. I would like to give you this opportunity to explain your actions before taking the matter to AN/I. Thanks, LemonMonday Talk 21:23, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Informational note: this is to let you know that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Regards, LemonMonday Talk 20:45, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of the BI issues noted above, BLPPRODs cannot be used on articles created before 18 March 2010. This was the case for all the articles you tagged with BLPPROD so I have removed the ones that were remaining. As it happens a couple of articles have been referenced as a result so it has at least provoked some good! It would take a braver man than I to propose extending the blpprods before the date though....Quantpole(talk) 22:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Quantpole. I only realise this after the event and was going to remove them but as you said some good has come from it!Bjmullan (talk) 23:28, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Salsburgh Revert Of Vandelism

[edit]

Many thanks for reverting the mindless vandelism of the Salsburgh wiki, much appreciated. (Brett ~ KaraokeMac (talk) 04:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

WPF1 Newsletter (February)

[edit]

This newsletter is being delivered to you because you signed up to this list. If you wish to stop receiving it, please remove your name.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Formula One at 03:49, 9 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bjmullan/Archive_2&oldid=1146653036"