User talk:Diplocksystem

Welcome

Hello, Diplocksystem! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Akerans (talk) 14:51, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Christy Walsh case

Generally if there is already a page on the subject (in this case there was), it's considered the "official" page and any pages created after that refer to it are redirected to that page. If I hadn't redirected it, anyone else probably would have done the same thing. You didn't do anything wrong as such and, in fact, you actually stopped to ask what was wrong when another user reverted your edit, which is a lot more than some people do. HalfShadow

Hi, I had done a search for Christy Walsh and the only return I got was for Christy Walsh (hurler) thus I thought to start a page. I later discovered that someone had directed all hits away from 'Christy Walsh case' as follows; "23:09, 20 June 2010 Brocach (talk | contribs) m (1,724 bytes) (moved Christy Walsh to Christy Walsh (hurler): disambiguation from miscarriage of justice case) (undo)"

Re: Iridescent's edit to Diplock courts

The reason he removed the link to the name in the section title is because you've also linked to the name in the text of the section in question; since you had a link there, you didn't need it again in the title. You generally don't link to the same thing more than once. HalfShadow 01:45, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to WP so thanks for letting me know that will follow your advice. many thanksDiplocksystem (talk) 08:14, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at more length here; in addition to the "no need to link it twice" HalfShadow mentions, putting links in titles confuses the screen reading software used by the blind so we generally try to avoid it. – iridescent 13:05, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brocach's Motives

I have undone user: Brocach Confilict of Interest tag because this person is associated with Monica McWilliams and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and has been using WP to remove any criticism that arises anywhere on WP which clashes with Brocach's interests. While neutrality has been my aim I had asked Brocach to point out anything that I had posted that does not adhere to WP standards of neutrality and thus avoid an editing war. I suggested that if Brocach could not define plausable reason for deletions, and unnessessary editing, that I would understand the intention to be purely acts of vandalism.Diplocksystem (talk) 16:51, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your soapboxing

The majority of your edits are WP:SOAPBOXing and biased, and there now appears to be a conflict of interest involved as well. Please read the links provided to find out more about why you can't do that. If you are unable to edit sensibly and in accordance with our policies and guidelines, then you may have your editing privileges taken away from you. At the moment, you are abusing the system by accusing other editors of vandalism and adding your own personal and non-neutral comments to articles. Please stop. If you feel this is unclear or unfair, then please, feel free to ask for more advice. ninety:one (reply on my talk) 22:47, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The person who flagged my editing seems to have some personal thing going on. I had asked Brocach that if there were problems with my edits that they be pointed out to me. In the absence of any explaination for why major deletions and editing are being done I informed user: Brocach that I would report the matter as vandalism to bring the matter to the attention of WP Mods/admins. I have looked at the formating, and information contained, on other miscarriage of justice case pages and appear to have done no worse. If I have edited improperly then I would be only too happy to correct if made aware of my errors. user: Brocach has deleted edits claiming that I am Christy Walsh, as justification for doing so, I am not. I have noticed that another person's user: Nmsmtedits have also been deleted where Brocach is claiming that that person is Christy Walsh. Brocach is related to Monica McWilliams -which I accept that I was soapboxing on that page earlier this evening as response to Brocach's behaviour. The Christy Walsh case causes some embarrassment to Ms McWilliams and thus Brocach's persistance in attempting to reduce it to a meaningless stub or some such. Brocach had attempted to direct all searches for Christy Walsh to return one hit --that of CW (hurler). Brocach takes a dim view to anything that reflects badly upon Monica McWilliams and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. I would be only to happy to follow your suggestions where you feel I do not appear to be neutral? Diplocksystem (talk) 00:27, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You, or someone who you are close to, has made several statements on the christywalsh.com website that indicate that they have strong points of view on this case. In such circumstances, it will be hard for you to separate neutral, sourced and factual statements from what are obviously deeply-held personal opinions. As you appear to be closely related to the case, it is probably best if you disengage from directly editing pages related to it (which includes Monica McWilliams, Christy Walsh case and Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission). If you feel that you are able to edit in accordance with our policies and guidelines, particularly those relating to neutrality and sourcing, then by all means try. But be warned that as you have made several unconstructive edits and now clearly have a conflict of interest in this matter, any further unconstructive edits could see you blocked. The best option is for you to provide (on the talk pages of those articles) sources & links that will enable other editors to add content to the articles in question, and for you to stand back now.

Brocach has stated several times that he is sympathetic to the cause, so please stop assuming bad faith in that regard.

I hope this helps, but again, feel free to come back to me if anything is unclear. ninety:one (reply on my talk) 12:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I initially only joined because Brocach had ensured that anyone searching for 'Christy Walsh' would only find Christy Walsh (hurler), with that issue now resolved -I couldn't be bothered beyond this. Though you might keep an eye on Brocach from time to time, as guardian of Monica McWilliams and NIHRC pages --only the good stuff is premitted with warts removed.Diplocksystem (talk) 15:42, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]