User talk:Dermo69

Word Of Caution

Abuse of good people will not be tolerated on Wiki. Abuse me again son and I'll have you blocked. Pink are crap, FACT!.--Play Brian Moore 19:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sinn Féin

Please do not deliberately introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did at Sinn Féin. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --Kwekubo 14:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A list of all changes made to every article is kept in the article's history, and a list of all contributions made by every user is also kept. This is to comply with the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, which state that a list of all authors of an article must be kept, and it also ensures that people who vandalise can be spotted by other users. --Kwekubo 15:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine Gael

Fine Gael declared a Republic, something Fianna Fáil had planned to do. FF could have had a United Ireland had they joined the Allied war effort but dev didn't. Does this mean FF aren't Republican, I think not. Also the statute of Westminister was a crucial step towards Irish freedom. Unfortunately for FG, FF got to reap the benefits of the statute but thats not the point, FG still got it implemented. Can I have a source for John Bruton and his pro-Paisley, anti-Hume ways please. The only other option for rejecting the Boundary Commision was more war and no side wanted that and it would have made Cumann na nGaedheal a pack of hypocrites.--Play Brian Moore 13:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

but let it be noted that the Anti-Irish stance of FG at the moment is stupid.--Play Brian Moore 13:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly sure Churchill was serious and taking away compulsory Irish is not the answer.--Play Brian Moore 21:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well then update the Histroy books because my feeble mind has been brainwashed in to thinking Churchill was willing to do this. I can't see how giving peopl a choice will make them all jump on the Irish bandwagon, the language is in dire straits and making it only optional cannot help the language.--Play Brian Moore 22:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Tis. The people who are bad at Irish can learn, I was bad at it but with a bit of work anyone can get good. I recomend the Gaeltacht to anyone. Everyone should have to learn Irish, especially foreigners.--Play Brian Moore 23:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No and this debate has reached loggerheads and will not go any further.--Play Brian Moore 23:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff.--Play Brian Moore 23:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Red Branch Knights

Yes it was me. On googling I saw the CAIN source and stuck in a reference for the loyalist group in 1992. Its just speculation but it looks to me like group used it as a cover name by the UDA or UVF to threaten southern targets at a delicate time in the peace process, around the time that loyalists were talking about a "pan-nationalist front between SF/SDLP and the Irish gvoernment. Just my hunch howver. Jdorney 22:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IPP

I wouldn't object to changing the description used; this can be achieved by editing Template:Irish Parliamentary Party/meta/shortname. Removing templates from the articles isn't a good way to achieve this change. Warofdreams talk 01:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because we have a large number of tables which link to political parties such as the Irish Parliamentary Party, we use templates to control aspects such as the abbreviated name and colour shown for each party. If you edit the template I linked above, it will change the short name shown in all tables for the IPP. If you remove the template from the article, then simple changes like this will no longer work. Hope this is clear - if you've got any more questions, just ask. Warofdreams talk 21:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I've changed it now. If you ever want to change another name, just edit the template like any other page. If you're not sure what the template is, click "edit this page" and then scroll down to see a list of the templates used on the page. Warofdreams talk 22:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Official IRA

References on List of IRA Chiefs of Staff were mixed up owing to the use of two difference referencing systems. This has now been rectified and the Garland reference is now where it should be.--Damac 11:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:My David Bowie image

Does anyone really care that if i use that image? Dermo69

They may, and we have a strict policy against the use of unfree "fair use" images outside of the article space and apart from critical commentary about the work. If you'd like to replace the image, there are currently three free pictures of David on the Wikimedia Commons, here. Images uploaded there can be accessed on Wikipedia just as if they had been uploaded here (e.g. Image:Bowie.jpg). ×Meegs 15:36, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

Sorry. I thought the image looked better down there. Shanequinlan01

Béal na mBláth

Hiya Dermo. There is a tiny village there in the shape of a crossroads with a petrol station and shop, which is called Béal na mBláth. Great work on Kilmichael, by the way. El Gringo 12:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS: You might want to vote on this redirect as the article's current function is to say that part of Ireland is part of Britain (as opposed to the UK): Talk:Britain

Yeah, I was there a few weeks back and uploaded that pic of the cross (as well as Kilmichael, Crossbarry, Bantry, Castletownbere, Clonakilty and other battle sites). As regards the vote, if you agree that the North is part of Great Britain rather than just part of the United Kingdom then you disagree with the redirect. If you think no part of Ireland is in Britain then you agree with the redirect. El Gringo 22:14, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sound, Dermo. Le gach dea-ghuí. El Gringo 22:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It means 'with every good wish' (literally: 'with every good prayer') and is very similar to the more common 'Le dea-mhéin', meaning 'with best wishes'. When Google fails you, here's an easy-to-use online Irish-English dictionary if you ever get stuck: http://www.crannog.ie/ Slán go fóill/ Bye for now. El Gringo 22:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aidan Work's user page

Hi, if you don't want your account to be blocked, I'd strongly advise you not to make such edits as this one. AnnH ♫ 12:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Starry Plough

Alright, I'll get that done once I finnish writing this article on Ardboe.

No problem mate, sorry about the mixup. 19:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC) 6 months editing, and still don't sign right.... --Pauric 19:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Myanmar

The way you moved this article without seeking consensus and ignoring previous threads in the talk page was not very civil. It will certainly be reverted soon for those reasons. If you still want to make the case for your alternative name, please place a nomination at WP:RQM before engaging on unilateral actions. I hope you understand the reasoning provided. Regards, Asterion^talk 14:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirects

I deleted Dermo69, which you had created as a redirect to your user page. Such cross-namespace redirects are inappropriate. See Wikipedia:Redirect#When should we delete a redirect? older ≠ wiser 16:57, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote: Good sir i am confused by what you're telling me.Perhaps if you could explain it to me.. Dermo69

Did you read the link above? Especially #5: It is a cross-space redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. You created Dermo69 in the main article namespace to redirect to your user page, which is in the User: namespace. older ≠ wiser 21:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Better spelling" of anti-humor

I reverted your changes. From WP:MOS: In June 2005, the Arbitration Committee ruled that, when either of two styles is acceptable, it is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change. For example, with respect to British spelling as opposed to American spelling, it would only be acceptable to change from American spelling to British spelling if the article concerned a British topic. Revert warring over optional styles is unacceptable; if the article uses colour rather than color, it would be wrong to switch simply to change styles, although editors should ensure that articles are internally consistent. If in doubt, defer to the style used by the first major contributor. Andre (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your sandbox

Hey. You created your sandbox on main namespace. These should be on user space, so I have moved it to User:Dermo/Sandbox. Prolog 18:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scanger

Just noticed what's been happening on Scanger. I'd recommend you work with editors who demand citation of facts in the article, as unreferenced facts can be removed without debate - the onus is on the editor including (or restoring) the facts to verify their accuracy. The assertion in your edit summary was not terribly constructive. Part of being a good wiki editor is sourcing information as well as writing it. I've seen similar cases where editors concerned about an article and unable to work with those who edit it get frustrated and it ends up in the deletion or review arenas. Clearly a lot of this is hard to source as it's something you see on the street but is not the focus of academic or popular study. Call it a failing of Wikipedia but such "primary research" is regarded as unacceptable. Deizio talk 21:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dermo, I left a note on Talk:Scanger when I removed the unsourced content originally if you want to discuss the article there. The bottom line is that all Wikipedia content must be reliably sourced, not original research and verifiable. If a piece of information hasn't been published in a reliable source, then unfortunately it cannot be included in Wikipedia. This article has been in an unsatisfactory state for a very long time, as you can see from the talk page, and your help in cleaning it up would be appreciated. Demiurge 16:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, why does User talk:Dermo69 redirect to User talk:Dermo? Are you getting these messages? Demiurge 16:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I noted to Demiurge, nobody should be looking to force everything in the article to be sourced. However, this article definitely needs a serious upgrade, both in the writing and reliable information department. If you and Demiurge (and anyone else for that matter) could work together to improve the article we've got the best shot at a decent page. Deizio talk 20:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nirvana (band)

I have reversed your move. Whilst there is another band, the US one is much more prominent, and there is a disambiguation sentence at the top for those looking for the other. If you feel that the move should be made, please go through the proceedure set out in Wikipedia:Requested moves.

Regards -- Beardo 00:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Dermo - strictly under WP rules and "being bold", you were entitled to make that move. But and Nirvana is a heavily watched (and fought over page - just look at the discussions about who should be regarded as members) - it is better to bring such a proposal to the community to reach concensus first. Regards -- Beardo 22:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Username

Hi again Dermo. Under the provisions of WP:USERNAME it's generally not appropriate to edit under one name and have the user and talk pages redirect to a separate account. Despite the similarity of the names, without a good reason to do so it can be interpreted as sockpuppetry. A major problem with the current configuration is it makes it more difficult to look at your contribution record. Seems like you're editing as Dermo69 so the thing to do would be delete the Dermo69 redirect pages, move the Dermo talk and userpages to Dermo69 and continue to edit as Dermo69. I can help with any delete/moves you want to do. Deizio talk 00:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved. Deizio talk 23:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irish History

You seem like you have a lot a knowledge with respect Irish history so maybe you would like to comment on the historic basis of this term here Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-02 IRA 'Volunteer' usage —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DownDaRoad (talk • contribs) 21:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Fair use image in user namespace

Hello!

You have used a fair use image in your user namespace (Image:Augusto Pinochet official portrait.jpg in User:Dermo69). Criterion 9 of the Wikipedia:Fair use criteria states that "Fair use images may be used only in the article namespace. Used outside article space, they are not covered under the fair use doctrine." I have replaced it with a free image (Image:Augusto Pinochet.jpg).

Sincerely, --Oden 20:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IRA Volunteer issue

Go to this page, an Indian guy is being forced by Loyalists and West Brit who are demanding that the rank of Volunteer is banned for describing the rank of members of the IRA – if you do not voice your opinion on this then they are going to get away with this bull Vintagekits 22:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Burma/Myanmar

Hi! Please join us! Chris 07:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bastin8

you'll get yourself into trouble ya nut!--Vintagekits 17:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dublin

Hi Dermo. Nope, Dublin is no longer a county. See Talk:Fingal, under the 'Status' heading, where its explained. I was as surprised as you were to find "my" County doesn't exist anymore. Bastun 16:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

County Londonderry

Please do not change references to County Londonderry to County Derry. The name of the county is Londonderry, and the name of the city Derry (see WP:IMOS). Ben W Bell talk 17:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your personal views are your matter, they are not valid for editing on Wikipedia, a neutral encyclopaedia for everyone. The accepted compromise on Wikipedia is that the county is called Londonderry, and the city Derry. Any alterations of these will be changed back. Ben W Bell talk 16:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It actually works quite well to serve to prevent the edit warring between two sides, those who want the official names and those who want the names that they are locally called. That example actually works fine, the geographical area it covers is called County Londonderry, it's only a few people who take issue with the naming that pick up an issue with it. But this encyclopaedia isn't for editors, it isn't for those who feel strongly about certain issues, it's about millions of readers who just want a piece of information, not a politically statement. Ben W Bell talk 17:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bloody Days

A tag has been placed on Template:Bloody Days, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Balloonguy 14:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Bloody days

Template:Bloody days has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Rocket000 11:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free you come along and help out here! Choose one articles and help improve that!!

The Irish Republicanism WikiProject is a collaboration of editors dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of Irish republicanism, Irish nationalism, and related organizations, peoples, and other topics.

(For more information on WikiProjects, please see Wikipedia:WikiProject and the Guide to WikiProjects).

--Vintagekits 12:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Green Nigger" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Green Nigger. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 18#Green Nigger until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm _Talk 04:59, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]