User talk:Parrot of Doom/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Oldham

Hello PoD, I've put a comment at Oldham as requested. Cheers. 86.27.78.158 (talk) 16:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem, but what do you reckon to the compass? 86.27.78.158 (talk) 16:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

PS: I was also 82.13.20.141 86.27.78.158 (talk) 16:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Emma

Hello! Your submission of The Emma at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Shubinator (talk) 17:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for The Emma

On May 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Emma, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Royalbroil 03:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

oops

Not sure why I didn't notice the other quote before this edit. You made the right call to undo. --an odd name 18:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

East Lancashire Railway 1844–1859

Congrats. I have passed this as a GA. --DavidCane (talk) 01:07, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Carrington Moss

I wouldn't worry about it, it got approved either way. :) I just went with the first of the two citations you put at the end of the sentence, which was a book reference. Keep up the great work! CarpetCrawler^{message me} 20:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Paper you asked me about

You asked me about this paper. I've searched high and low and I can't find a downloaded copy. I'm wondering if rather than spend the $31.50 I just used the comments in the abstract. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah ok, worth a try anyway. I've been hunting for a naughty way to use those websites, no luck so far although the Jstor one can be accessed through unis and colleges Parrot of Doom (talk) 22:38, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Whitefield

Jeff, thanks for your query re: Whitefield article qualifying for WP:GAN, which you posted on my talk page a month ago. Sorry, I have been out of the loop for too long - not been very well for a while and aso fed up of idiot hijacks by (at least on face value) the youth of today. The Semp family and their friends appear to have a lot to answer for, although of course it could just as well be some malicious "not right" trying to implicate them. I know some of the family, BTW, in a vague way via past work environments and also local newspaper articles etc - no particular reason to believe that they are a party to what has gone on, which is hopefully enough verbiage to keep the lawyers away.

I'll have to read up on what WP:GAN is, as I'm very ignorant on this sort of stuff. Got a whole load of other things I'd like to add to the article, though. Just need to get my head into gear and also work out how to source the numerous anecdotal items which have been passed on to me over the years. Also have a couple of books to hand that need a thorough dissection, most notably an 1893 copy of The Memorials of Stand Chapel - there will be some meat in there, somewhere. Better had be - it cost me a tenner via AbeBooks ;)

The To Do section of that article is a bit of a worry to me. I know bits relating to most of what is on the list but I have no supporting written evidence, so it would be pointless me adding the knowledge.

Found some beautiful pictures, taken around 1910, of the area near to Stone Pale - and they tonight evoked many memories among a group of mates at the Eagle & Child - but, alas, they're copyrighted to a local chap who frequents Flickr. I may have a word with him, as I think that I also know a woman who was born in the house immediately next door to the one from which the photos were taken ... so there is an off-chance that she may have info also. One of the photos appears to show, at a great distance, the kiln stack of the brickworks.

You'll gather that I'm more into the history than the present day. The present frightens the life out of me!

Simon Sitush (talk) 00:11, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Jstor and others

Please remind me if I don't respond in a couple of days - wrapping up a long GA review and some real-life stuff are priorities right now. How do you wan tme to present the info? You may need to email me via Email this user so I can supply info. --Philcha (talk) 12:41, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Message received. It would help enormously if you could provide URLs of articles whose abstracts suggest they may be of interest. My Talk page would be best for that, so I can just click in from there. --Philcha (talk) 12:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Sent 4 - transmitted suspiciously fast considering about 2.5MB, let me know if any probs. --Philcha (talk) 21:18, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you should have included specific quotes for "cunt" as the response was predictable. Options:

• (preferred option) Drop the quotes and focus on the pages from the intro. If necessary find Chaucers' apology for using "queinte" in Miller's Tale. Can't remember the exact original text in the Tale but I bet it's online; IIRC the Penguin translation is "caught her by the quim". Use the definition / usage pages just as back up ("further examples at", w/o quotes) in the ref text, not the main text.
• Use the preceding quote from Freiris of Berqwick, which hardly needs tranlsation - "she grabbed her cunt and gave it two slaps".
• (last resort) You may now have to look for other sources using the search string I quoted. --Philcha (talk) 13:20, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• Just looked in to tell you what an exemplary job you and the team have done with Gropecunt Lane.--Wetman (talk) 15:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Carrington Moss

On May 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Carrington Moss, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

JamieS93 (talk) 19:21, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Award!

		All Around Amazing Barnstar
		For your truly astonishing contributions to Wikipedia — your work on North West England; its history, geology, industry and people; coupled with your photographic additions and the amazing Gropecunt Lane are deeply appreciated and have restored my faith in the project! --Jza84 |  Talk  21:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree with Jza's sentiments, you've got a truely eclectic output and raise the bar for what the rest of us should be aiming for. Nev1 (talk) 21:08, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks chaps, I do enjoy this lark :) Now, a serious question. Do you think that Cock Lane ghost which I'm revamping in my sandbox, should be renamed to The curious case of Scratching Fanny and the Cock Lane ghost? Parrot of Doom (talk) 21:35, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Cromford Canal

The chances are probably slim, but when you were researching the Manchester Bolton & Bury Canal did you come across any references to Cromford Canal? I'm trying to make a short section for the Derwent Valley Mills, but the article on the canal itself is unreferenced. Nev1 (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I should be ok now actually as I've found a copy of Tranformation of a Valley which has stuff on the canal. If I'm still short of stuff, I look for something by Hadfield. Nev1 (talk) 21:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Jean michel jarre third rendezvous.ogg

Thanks for uploading File:Jean michel jarre third rendezvous.ogg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:05, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

VM GAN

Alrighty, and thank you very much :) WhisperToMe (talk) 02:28, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Varbas blocked as sock of banned user

He was determined to be a sockpuppet of a banned user, so all of his edits, AFD votes and etc. are invalid. You can feel free to prod anything he removed the prod tag from as it doesn't count, like, for instance Stephen Baysted. DreamGuy (talk) 20:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater Manchester June Newsletter, Issue XVI

Delivered on 3 June 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Nev1 (talk) 13:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Nick Griffin

Could you pleasae restrict the number of edits you do in a day as it makes it very difficultm t0o check them all.Slatersteven (talk) 13:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

That's the first time I've ever seem someone asked to slow down their editing! Stop it PoD, you're making the rest of us look bad. Nev1 (talk) 13:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

It isn't the first time, and it usually happens when I kick poor-quality articles into touch - and this article was pretty bad. Parrot of Doom (talk) 13:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not surprised, it must have been a POV minefield. In all seriousness Slatersteven, Parrot of Doom can edit at whatever rate he likes. It's good to have someone check over other's edits for grammar and stuff, but please remember that you do not own the article and other people are allowed to edit without having to ask permission. The article's only 2,400 words long so shouldn't take too long to read. Nev1 (talk) 13:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I did hesitate to edit this, since the man's political views are quite the opposite of my own, but I value the right to free speech and I think people have the right to read an entirely unbiased encyclopaedic article of such a contentious figure. I'm quite happy for people to read the facts and draw whatever conclusions they wish from it.

Actually I'm rather annoyed with myself that I feel the need to reiterate my opposition to his views, but I would guess that some people will draw the wrong conclusion from my desire to improve the article. Parrot of Doom (talk) 13:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

My views are not relevant (nor do you know what they are you assume what they are), and I wouold ask you to please assume good faith on my part. I asked beue there were something like 100 edits in a 24 hour period, which make schecking them very tedius. I do not claim (and never claimed) ownership of the page. I just asked that you take into account the fact that others may not wish to wade through 100 odd edits to check them. Slatersteven (talk) 14:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

There's no need to check the revisions individually, you could check them in bulk. Nev1 (talk) 14:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I have made no mention of your views and no assumption of bad faith. I do not care if other people find '100 odd edits' tedious to check. I am more concerned with the fact that an article on a particularly notable UK politician was in a disgraceful condition. Perhaps you're just annoyed that now you feel the need to check each source, whereas before the sources didn't exist and therefore did not require checking. That isn't my fault, or my concern, and not a view I'm even slightly interested in. Parrot of Doom (talk) 14:31, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I appologise but your respose of 13:51 when I first read it seemed to be stating that you opposed my views, re-reading it you seem to be talking (I think) about Mr Griffin. I was not asking for the ability to check evedry source but other editors need a chance to review changes made to a page.Slatersteven (talk) 15:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

They have all the time in the world to do so. Literally. Parrot of Doom (talk) 15:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

← I've been asked to slow down editing articles almost since I arrived here. Can you guess how I reply?[1] Fuck 'em I say. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Personally I find lots of small edits easier to check than a few larger ones. (Using popups makes them very easier), also it is easier to query or revert a small edit, than part of a big one. Martin451 (talk) 00:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Personally I don't give a damn, so long as the job gets done, but when I'm asked to copyedit something I always try to make more smaller edits, with more detailed edit summaries, because that's easier to check, and as you say, revert if necessary. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, it's the end product that's important, so check that and never mind the individual changes. Individual changes are easier to check (and make and revert), but you can still check in bulk. Nev1 (talk) 00:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Re Sinking Immigrants, or as the BBC interviwer summarised it "murdering". Fair enough as long as we get it in. There are numerous references in all major papers, so no dearth of material. No doubt he will add further statements. By the way am I right in thinking that George Monck, 1st Duke of Albemarle had a house in Grub Street? It seems rather down at heel.--Streona (talk) 13:50, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

He did say that he did not want to murder anyone although sinking boats is an especially dangerous activity which in many cases involvesthe expenditure of quantities of 20mm ammunition. Griffin does suggest throwing life rafts and abaondoning them presumably in the middle of the Gulf of Sirte. The usual rule of the sea is to pick up people in this situation. Grand Admiral Donitz was prosecuted as a war criminal for a similar policy. I do not suggest that we be at all POV against Griffin, just brutally honest. As I am sure you will be.--Streona (talk) 14:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Sister

[2] [3] [4] [5]

1 & 2 not RS, 3 & 4 are better. Worth a mention as she stood as an NF candidate. Martin451 (talk) 23:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Vickery Meadow

Hi! I suppose I could renominate in maybe a month. Should I do that?

There had been no edits to the actual nomination page since May 27 - I made some replies on the page, but I received no further input on the page itself. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

• Ah. Because there had been no further edits after May 27, I wasn't quite clear whether you had already indicated what was needed and what wasn't - I'm still unsure, at the moment, of what is still outstanding and what isn't. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Well, nothing from Part 2 had been crossed out, so I wasn't sure if you had looked at yet. I made edits to solve at least some of the conditions in Part 2 (by adding definitions, etc) WhisperToMe (talk) 15:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Adminship?

 :-D --Jza84 |  Talk  13:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Griffinbor

As we have compromised perhaps now is the time to start altering a number of issues that may make GAN rather difficult.Slatersteven (talk) 18:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I have only had a quick scan of the article and I sugest a very sever proof readng. I would sugest waiting at least 24 hours before submiting it so I can have more time (sadley today I am a bit busy) to read it more fulleySlatersteven (talk) 12:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Why the   in your recent edit

Why did you replace two spaces each with a   in your recent edit of This Is It (Michael Jackson concerts)? (I'm always looking to learn about new mark-up tricks.) -- Thinking of England (talk) 09:35, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, I see it is a non-breaking space, but is that a general typographical rule we follow here, to avoid the break following a number. If that is the case, should it be applied to the "£50 million" and "£200 million" in the same sentence you edited? -- Thinking of England (talk) 09:48, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

(BTW, the paragraph above was an initial followup, and not a reply to your response.) Thanks for the WP:NBSP link. I've peeked at parts of the WP:MOS but it's probably time to start perusing it. Regarding your "bah, I don't know how to stop the browser auto formatting those codes", that took me a couple of minutes before I figured out replacing the "&" with a "&". (Ha! that was fun to code.) Thank again. -- Thinking of England (talk) 10:06, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Michael Jackson / PTSD

Hi Parrot of Doom, I have recognized that you undid my cotribution on Talk:Michael Jackson. Actually it was not ment as a gossip, but as a serious suggestion for completing the article, and I consider the matter to be a major factor concerning Michael Jackson's personality, his work, his death and his legacy. (sorry for my bad english) -- Marcus 91.12.224.88 (talk) 13:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Nick griffin matriculation.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Nick griffin matriculation.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Nick griffin matriculation.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Nick griffin matriculation.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5