User talk:HighKing/Archives/2010/June

Great Britain and Ireland

I've rewritten that page again another way trying to include your perspective. I hope it is a meeting ground between us both. --RA (talk) 09:23, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Looking good. Your addition of "as a word on its own" makes your point, but ensures readers understand that they may be looking up a phrase/entity, or they may have to be pointed to two entities joined by "and". I've redirected "Britain and Ireland" here too - do you think we should also have a small section dealing with "Britain" as a word on its own? --HighKing (talk) 09:39, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Saw the redirect. It's much of a muchness which to point at which (but "Great Britain" seems to be the wiki preference).

I've stuck in "Britain" as another form of "Great Britain", but I wouldn't both adding sections explaining the words any more. It would just be forking off info (better) dealt with elsewhere. --RA (talk) 10:15, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks RA. Wasn't trying to be obtuse or deliberately awkward in our discussion either. Too much respect for you for that. --HighKing (talk) 13:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

try [1] Mister Flash (talk) 13:10, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello, High King. If you are talking of the posting that is still in the thread, it might be a good idea if it was deleted till you receive a reply from an oversighter. Cheers. Jack forbes (talk) 16:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Taking a closer look, I do see oversights at 13:24, 13:25 and 13:26. Jack forbes (talk) 16:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

By their very nature, you can't see oversights... :-) These are revdel's AFAIK. --HighKing (talk) 17:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Doh! I won't be going for a job as oversighter any time soon then! I guess I thought I was smarter than I really am. :) Jack forbes (talk) 17:18, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppet

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HighKing. Mister Flash (talk) 19:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

You & MF should be on guard, there's a prankster editor going around, trying to get both of you in trouble. GoodDay (talk) 21:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed. Now I wonder why this editor has decided to pop up now. I seriously doubt that Mister Flash would do this, but after the threatening email and his SPI filing, I'm starting to believe anything. --HighKing (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I believe it's a banned editor merely evading his block & entertaining himself. GoodDay (talk) 22:05, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

MBM & MF

It appears they're are the same person. PS: I suspect there's a 3rd sock, who's recently commented, but I'll stop there. GoodDay (talk) 15:13, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

There are probably socks going back some time. Good call earlier. RashersTierney (talk) 22:38, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Rashers ;-) --HighKing (talk) 12:48, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

No prob ;-) RashersTierney (talk) 15:06, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Been off line all week and just saw the news. Great call, that's one less disruptive editor gone. Bjmullan (talk) 16:13, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:47, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Republic_of_Ireland_national_football_team

The edit I made about Ireland losing to England in 1882 13-0 is true, and is supported on the England National Football team wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.110.62.206 (talk) 17:40, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Nope, that match was against the "Ireland National Football Team", which no longer exists. At that time, the IFA (currently organizes and manages the Northern Ireland National Football Team) were in charge of the team. --HighKing (talk) 18:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppetry (2)

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HighKing. Thank you. LevenBoy (talk) 13:03, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

LOL. User:Fionnghlas isn't/wasn't me, and the rest have already been dealt with in the previous SPI. A rather extreme reaction, don't you think, because I asked you to explain your relationship with the sockpuppets MidnightBlueMan and Mister Flash... which you still haven't done... --HighKing (talk) 13:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

They aren't me, and if you think otherwise you know what to do about it. How about Popaice? Was that you? Please clear this up one way or the other. And the IPs, and Insectgirl, it would help if you made a definitive statement on the matter. LevenBoy (talk) 15:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't accuse you of being MBM.MF, but I am highlighting the ... coincidental oddness ... that you re-appear right after they're blocked. And any/all statements will be made at the SPI accusation, which should be thrown out since you've not provided any evidence. Once again, I ask, what is your relationship with MBM and MF? Have you ever edited using any other account? --HighKing (talk) 16:37, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

No I haven't. I watch what's going on most of the time and was absent for a while but observed your SPI and that of the others. Now please answer my questions, because the SPI case I've raised may go the same way as the other. If you answer the questions now I may, depending on your answers, withdraw it. LevenBoy (talk) 16:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't care about the SPI case. It's already been dealt with once, quite thoroughly, and I expect this one will be closed rapidly as an obvious fishing exercise. I note that you answered the question as to editing with any other accounts. You still haven't answered the question I've now asked 4 times - what is your relationship with MBM and MF? --HighKing (talk) 17:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

None whatsoever. And your answers to my questions? LevenBoy (talk) 17:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

'Tis best to let the SPI on yourself (HK) run its course, to end any suspicions. Meanwhile, it may be time for another SPI (hint hint). GoodDay (talk) 22:29, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Adminship

Thanks for your comments here. I've left a response. --RA (talk) 08:49, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

E-mail

Hi, just to tell you I've dropped you in an e-mail. --Footyfanatic3000 ^{(talk  · contribs)} 11:26, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

OK --HighKing (talk) 21:36, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

MuZemike, the clerk for LevenBoy's SPI, has said that you may e-mail him your evidence. The case has been put on hold until the evidence is received. --Footyfanatic3000 ^{(talk  · contribs)} 15:39, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks FF. --HighKing (talk) 17:34, 27 June 2010 (UTC)