User talk:Roleplayer/Archive01

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Roleplayer, for the period 19 July 2006 – 13 January 2008.
Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Welcome!

Hello, Roleplayer/Archive01, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for joining our community. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. First thing: be bold! Editors are always happy to correct or revert mistakes and discuss changes with which they disagree. Here are some links you might find useful:

And for more detailed information:

Help pages - the instruction manual, contains everything you could possibly want to know
The five pillars of Wikipedia - our principles, or how to get on with other editors
Manual of Style - how to format articles, where to place pictures, and other stylistic matters.

You can also check out the community portal, which has lots of ideas on how you can help Wikipedia.

All of this information can be daunting, but if you have a question and can't find the answer, you can always ask me on my talk page or go to Wikipedia:Where to ask a question. One last thing: please sign your name when leaving messages for others on article and user talk pages using (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. I hope you enjoy editing and that this welcome message is more appreciated than the first ;-) --Sam Blanning^(talk) 16:28, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, I was wondering how to get rid of that! Roleplayer 16:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Water Eaton

Please see my response to your comment. -- Roleplayer 23:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, the name were confusing me. See my response on the talk page. If my suggestion fixes the problem, I can make those changes. Vegaswikian 23:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Dorney

Why is the information about the local parish church being dedicated to St James valid and important? Unless it has some unusual local significance (e.g. some story that it was dedicated to James because he miraculously appeared to save the village from a flood or something) then it seems to me to be no more significant than the information that the local school is named after King Edward or the local supermarket is a Tesco. --Spondoolicks 11:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

If someone was looking up a particular village to find out about it's history, the church played such an important part in English rural history that information about the church is important information that needs to be in the article. The dedication isn't the only piece of info that should be there either, information about the structure and design of the church and where in the parish it is can tell you so much about the history of the wider village. You mention that it is no more important than who the school is named after and the like: this is also information that should be included in my opinion: why the school is named after a particular person can also expand and illustrate the history of the location. Saying that the local shop is a Tesco's is going a bit far though... -- Roleplayer 14:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Spam at Gerrards Cross

I've noticed similar spam in other articles of places in the Beaconsfield area (thebestof.beaconsfield link). I challen ged the person adding it and was told that it was a legitimate information source. As a more experienced user, would you say this link is useful or spam? -- Roleplayer 16:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. I've seen the "thebestof" link inserted into numerous different articles about different towns and cities, always by an anonymous IP user. I've seen it deleted/reverted on a number of occasions on the grounds of spam; I'd agree likewise in this case. Looking back over the page history for Gerrards Cross, I see it has in fact already been deleted as spam once before [1]. The user who inserts it has used numerous different IPs (hence violating WP:SOCK), and has contributed nothing to any page except to insert that link ([2] for just a few on that particular IP); hence, I think it is reasonable to assume it is commercial spamming. As a matter of principle, WP discourages too many external links being inserted into articles, unless they are absolutely essential to the article, or provide a particularly detailed coverage of the matter in question. In this case, "thebestof" websites fail this test too, as they are basic at best and provide minimal relevant content. That's my opinion on the matter, at least. :) DWaterson 16:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I have removed similar links that I have seen from two other articles: Slough and London Borough of Richmond. -- Roleplayer 23:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

River Ouzel

Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia. And thanks for moving River Lovat to River Ouzel; I thought of that, but wasn't bold enough to make the change. JonH 11:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Word Association

What does SpongeBob Squarepants have to do with Ethelred the Unready? -- Roleplayer 10:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

SpongeBob always says "I'm Ready!" which sounds a lot like "Unready". I was just trying to make it interesting. AKKIfokkusu^TaLk 18:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Change to Bierton made on 18th October 2006

The paragraph:

Like many areas of mixed social housing the occupants get to witness and befriend a wide social mix including village legends such as Percy, mad Mick and Carol.Anybody locked in their rich or poor ghettos doesn't know what their missing.Sadly since the advent of right to buy this diversification is disappearing fast.

Apart from naming non-notable people who don't show up on a basic google search, the sentence starting "anybody locked..." is not encyclopedic, and is classed as nonsense by Wikipedia standards. -- Roleplayer 22:48, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your cryptic critique of my sociological piece on Great Lane. Having lived there for 32 years I feel as though my research was extensive and although it may have strayed a little from the bland objectivity normally portrayed in encyclopaedias, I felt that the comment "nonsense" portrayed a lack of appreciation for my intimate affection for my subject matter. I would welcome suggestions as to how I can contribute in a more acceptable manner.Tedtaylor1 22:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Template talk:Lord Lieutenancies

Ho, I have answered you on the above. ~~ Phoe _talk 15:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC) ~~

Watermead

It seems you have cancelled my page about the parish council which I had not yet finished as I did not have the time and made other changes to Watermead. However you have left in the Watermead photo and the link to Watermead Country Park which was Watermead Park which did not go anywhere as there was no page there. When I have the time I will be doing a lot more editing and I would be grateful if you could not make changes to my work. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.13.135.234 (talk) 18:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC).

Several points.

First, what you did was to copy and paste a move from one page to another, which should be avoided because it invalidates the licence under which information is held on Wikipedia. That's why your edits were reverted. Second, the Watermead Parish Council page was nothing more than a sub-stub, which should have gone in the main Watermead article, which is why it was merged and redirected. Finally you cannot ask other editors not to make changes to "your" work - this is an open source encyclopedia, and you cease ownership of any information you upload the moment you press the "save" button. Thank you. -- Roleplayer 01:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Geoffrey Palmer

Geoffrey Palmer is still featured in the article, just not where you placed it. He is further up, alongside other previously notable residents such as Roald Dahl and Robert Louis Stevenson. -- Roleplayer 00:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I admit that I did not thoroughly read the article about Great Missenden. I "scanned" it, and obviously very carelessly. Sorry!

Saguamundi

WikiProject Milton Keynes

You may be interested in a proposed WikiProject Milton Keynes. I proposed the idea to gauge how much interest it will attract. Please leave your interest and any comments at the proposal page, we'd love to hear from you. Regards, Severo^TC 21:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Curzon Street

Can you please revisit this discussion. I have done some digging and have found that the street has a very prestigious history, which I have added to the article, including several references. I believe the page is now of a quality whereby it should be kept. -- Roleplayer 22:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Well done on improving Curzon Street immeasurably. Do you have time to work similar magic on Cork Street and Welbeck Street (in a similar predicament) too?! Best regards, Jonathan Bowen 22:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I have looked at Welbeck Street and was basically only able to add info about the Greek chapel that was there in 1862. I will look at Cork Street tomorrow as I have to go to bed soon! -- Roleplayer 22:24, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Have changed to Keep in light of the rewrite (although I still think there's a nettle to be grasped here, as outlined in the discussion above with DGG, as I'm still not convinced that the individual streets that aren't of importance as streets (the primary A-roads and famous streets such as Oxford Street etc) really warrant their own articles. Would it make sense to merge-and-expand the stubby articles on streets in areas into single longer articles (eg, Streets of Mayfair), along the lines of what I did with the roads making up A215 road following this AfD — which (although I - successfully - argued keep at the time) convinced me that the way to go with minor roads (and their cousins, the closed railway lines) was the mergist route — iridescent (talk to me!) 22:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I honestly don't know because I'm quite new to this. I looked at the streets that are up for deletion on an 1862 map of London that I happen to have in my possession (an Edward Stanford no less) and Curzon Street immediately leapt out at me. I had intended to do other stuff this evening and have spent far too long on it now...! -- Roleplayer 22:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Curzon street

I changed to Keep. Bearian 22:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Cork Street deletion review

Hi, just wanted to give you the heads up that I have listed Cork Street for deletion review, based on the fact that no consensus was reached in the deletion discussion. I am writing this message to all contributors of the discussion, whether they voted keep or delete. -- Roleplayer 23:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and good luck. Thank you especially for your efforts on Curzon Street and Welbeck Street. I would say that Cork Street is actually the most well-known of these three streets in contemporary London, but that is life. I am rather busy at the moment, but when the furor has died down, I will work on a better well-referenced version. Could you give the link for the deletion review page? Best wishes, Jonathan Bowen 20:14, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 September 7#Cork Street -- Roleplayer 00:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Cork street deletion review

Hello there. Thanks for the notice. I generally don't get involved in that sort of thing. One the Mighty Oz has spoken ... or the AfD is closed, I don't care to get stressed out any more about such matters. Now, if something is speedily deleted, without a chance for "peer review" at WP:AFD, then you can get my support. Best of luck, and thanks again for your good faith in reaching out to me. Bearian 17:41, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, I have been on a two week technology sabbatical - OK, hell, so we used the Kate's Blackberry ... it may be too late, but I'll have a look at the debate. Cheers. Kbthompson 23:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Speen

Like I said in the discussion page, wikipedia is for information. It's name IS hilarious, and therefore it is information. Why am I getting bullied for posting information?! HoOhMajor 10:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Because it's irrelevant, unencyclopedic, POV and offensive. -- Roleplayer 10:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Lmao, thanks for telling me that NOW, after about 12 arguments. Cheers(!) In future I'll not put that sort of information on Wikipedia. Christ, Scribble Monkey could've pointed out the information was "offensive" and "unencyclopedic" beforehand. Actually yes, thank you. I'm kind of new lol but my cousin isn't X_X he showed me wikipedia thank you again HoOhMajor 10:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Chubs and Disambiguation

Greetings. Recently, on Tue 16 Oct, I constructed a disambiguation page for the various fish known as chubs. After having done so, I began to contemplate whether that page and the current Chub page might be better named. I posted a discussion on the Chub page but it's not yet received any comment. I noticed from the article's revision history that you had made one or more contributions to the page. Consequently, I thought I might profit from your advice at Talk:Chub#Page title if you have a moment or two to spare. Thanks. — Dave (Talk | contribs) 03:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Dunsmore

As an English historian I find it very difficult to understand why place names in Devon, Buckinghamshire and Warwickshire would have names that are of Scottish origin. Can you explain your reasoning for saying why the Anglo-Saxon origin is incorrect please? -- Roleplayer (talk) 15:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)`

The same reasons why places have names of French, Irish, Spanish,and German origin. My surname is Dunsmore and am well schooled in Scottish history. If you do a little research into the name it will not take long for you to discover the origin of the name for yourself. I am sure you will agree The name Dunsmore originating from Dunna's moor does not quite sound right. Dunsmore is an old Scottish name and is a sept of the Murray clan. It does make interesting reading to find out how they were involved in scottish war of independance, Jacobite rebellion etc... MJD55 (talk) 15:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I am a Buckinghamshire historian. The Scots never had any sphere of influence in this area at all. It is ludicrous to suggest that a place in Buckinghamshire should have a name that I can prove dates back to at least the 12th century, that has an origin based on a language spoken hundreds of miles away.. Dunna was a common Anglo-Saxon name from this area, based on the original Brythonic name Doena. Dunna was a land owner in nearby Wendover, as confirmed by local documentation. In manorial records of the 12th century the Buckinghamshire Dunsmore was called Dunnasmor, which demonstrates the Anglo-Saxon origin. If you were a historian you would know that two places can have the same name, with entirely different origins. For example the common place name Walton can either refer to "walled settlement" or "settlement of the Walhs", Walh being the Anglo-Saxon name for the original Celts who inhabited Britain. It just depends where in the country the place is. Your Scottish Dunsmores may well have the origin that you are proposing, that does not mean by any stretch of the imagination that the English ones have the same origin. I am going to change the English place names back to the English origin of the name, please do not revert my edits again. -- Roleplayer (talk) 18:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

For a scientific example of two similar organisms having diverse origins, see Analogy (biology). Etymology runs by the same principle. By equal measure running a google search on "convergent etymology" will also demonstrate results. -- Roleplayer (talk) 19:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

thats a good arguement you should have stated that earlier rather than act like a stubborn pratt. Looks like the name is a coincidence john, We were both correct however I was unaware of another origin of the name apart from the scottish

Great Horwood Article

What was the multiple vandalism on Great Horwood Article. I scrolled down the list and it had an IP address below your's and below the IP Address was my username but i only fixed spelling errors from the wikipedia spell checker, was it only done by the IP Address →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 21:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi,

If you look the spelling error that you corrected formed part of the vandalism that had been added about a minute before. See here. -- Roleplayer (talk) 16:22, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

MCS Rukh

Hi there. Just to let you know that this is not the longest construction project in the world - the Sagrada Família in Barcelona has been under construction since 1882 and they still haven't finished building it. Also saying that something is a joke in local folklore is POV unless this can be strongly referenced. -- Roleplayer (talk) 21:42, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

':) OK! Maybe the world status is not achieved or even the national, but it's truely one of the longest. In local folklore it's counted as the world achievement, though. As for a reference, how about me living in that city for over 12 years? Can that be the strong one? (probably, not)I don't think that this joke is officially documented, but I can tell you for sure that any people who hail from there can justify this.

Respectfully, Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 22:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

That is the walking joke in the city and there are no references accept, maybe, visiting the city. Can this be considered as the longest stadium renovation? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 22:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't know the answers to your questions, except that personal experience doesn't count as a reference: if you can't find a reference for something that you know from, say, where you live, then you at risk of adding original research. -- Roleplayer (talk) 22:32, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I'm not pushing. It's totally fine. I'll do what I can to refelct upon my knowledge. Thanks for pointing to the record, though :) That's a good trivia. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 22:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Vince and Aylesbury Grammar School

I'm wondering what aspect of the IMDB page you would consider to be a "reliable source." A blog posting hardly qualifies, and I can't see anything else there. Pairadox (talk) 01:27, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Alexander Vince

I noticed you speedied this earlier today - I'm not in a rush to recreate it with the genuine information, though you do know there is an actor called Alexander Vince, who was in The Others and currently goes to Aylesbury Grammar School, all of which was claimed in the article, don't you? He's on imdb.

As I say I'm not in a rush to recreate it as the extra info was either added by him or other people at the same school in order to get at him, though I do think removing all the redlinks that lead to the article was a bit unnecessary. -- Roleplayer (talk) 00:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I certainly believe there is such a person as the actor of whom you spoke, and I don't doubt for a moment that he played the role in the film that you say he played. The issue is, is he notable, in the Wikipedia-specific sense of that word? Two people didn't think so -- the editor who tagged the article, and the administrator (me) who deleted it. We measure each article against a set of standards that have developed over time, as a consensus of Wikipedia users who have commented. In general, I would suggest that it takes more than one role in a film, especially as a child actor, to create a notable career. Notable actors -- notable people in general -- are those who have had multiple articles written about them in different publications. You can find out more about notability by followingthis link and looking in the "people" section; you can also read about our requirement for reliable sources and verifiability. You also seemed to be unhappy that I traced down and deleted the links to the article; that's actually part of the responsibility of the administrator who deletes the article. If that were overlooked, Wikipedia would soon be full of links that led nowhere, so deleting administrators have to go through a step-by-step process to ensure that they've tracked down all the "red-line" links. It doesn't always get completely done, and you will find links that lead nowhere, but in an ideal world, you never would; Wikipedia would be at its most useful then, which is why I take care to delete all the attached links when I delete an article. I hope this explains our policies to your satisfaction but if you have further questions, I'm at your service; just leave a further note on my talk page. Accounting4Taste:talk 04:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I should also mention that IMDB is not considered a reliable source such that information there can be used as the reference for a Wikipedia article; databases that can be edited by anyone, ironically including Wikipedia, are not always reliable. Accounting4Taste:talk 04:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Deprivation in Buckinghamshire

I have restored the deprivation comment, and referenced it. There are wards in the High Wycombe urban area that are among the 20% most deprived areas in the country. -- Roleplayer (talk) 18:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

You really have to be very left wing to think that is a valid definition of deprivation. It is about inequality, rather than deprivation, and was purposely and cynically devised by left-wingers to enable them to claim that there is deprivation everywhere. It is non-neutral to claim that 20% of England is deprived, and without that assumption, this system of evaluation falls to pieces. Using it in the way you are doing, is passing off biased opinion as fact. Ravenhurst (talk) 12:55, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

The source is a good one and says that it is an area of deprivation, and I've worked in the area as a local government representative and can assure you there are areas of deprivation in High Wycombe. To a large extent it is about inequality as well, for example living in an expensive area where housing and council tax take up most of your budget, there is very little spare cash left behind to enjoy life with. But to say that the definition of deprivation in a Tory council document is "very left wing" is laughable. -- Roleplayer (talk) 18:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Brian Paddick

What does the raid on the Button Factory have to do with Brian Paddick attending a meeting? Did he order for it to go ahead? This needs to be made clearer. -- Roleplayer (talk) 22:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

It has agreat deal to do with Paddick - he is the Commander of L Division where days earlier he had attended the MPA meeting comitted to formulating a consultative, outreach and diversified approach to local policing. This operation would not have proceeded without his fore knowledge and it not simply a mater of whether he ordered the operration and he may have done so or been instumental in its being agreed. Is it not to be windowed simply because full disclosure has never been forthcoming? It was subsequently raised with him and with the Lambeth MPA representative. Paddick ignored the representations that were made to him. I live in Lambeth and worked for a decade in local government with police connected responsibilities. Why on earth ought not this juxtaposition of events to be discussed in context? Were Lambeth Special Branch also implicated in Operation Dursley? What (obviously selectively speaking) has "ANARCHIST" orientated Paddick comments on a local Lambeth website got strictly to do with "cannabis" policing policy? Its the way the cookies crumble these matters become extremely discursive and if you wanted to talk about all this why did you not talk first instead of deleting my earlier posts? (----) TheGuntz.

Then I think you need to point that out (though you're bordering on original research with a dash of your own point of view). The edit was removed (and has been again by someone else) because the relevance is not immediately apparent.

This operation would not have proceeded without his fore knowledge

Unless you can provide a good verifiable reference to prove that, the article is making a statement that it cannot back up in Court and trust me Wikipedia has been taken to Court plenty of times over much less.

he may have done so or been instumental in its being agreed.

This is circumspection, and evidences to me that you don't have the proof necessary to demonstrate that this claim is factual.

Why on earth ought not this juxtaposition of events to be discussed in context?

Because an encyclopedia is a series of referenced and verifiable statements of fact, not a discussion forum.

Also please learn how to format articles, and particularly references - it makes life easier for other editors. -- Roleplayer (talk) 23:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

--- to Roleplayer. This won't do at all really. In my original posting which you deleted was brief. So far as the MPA meeting was concerned the link references I gave were verificable and impeccable - the MPA's own full "Minutes" with Brian Paddick's attendance itemised in black and white. For Operation Dursley I gave a link for online verification which referred to a number of named media reports about the police operation - not every word about these matters is on-line but there are newspaper libraries - such as the one at Collindale where there are records. I assume that Wikipedia is not claiming that such sources are not adequate - it cannot be for in the current article there are many news reports linked for verification and information. These items of information stood by themselves as viable. I did not make cliams for them they stand for themselves. I did not link the URBAN75 Paddick chat information it has been very widely publicised and was already withiin the ambit of the article and isn't a matter that Paddick has even been in denial about. To have deleted these factul matters is completely wrong and then to be put on trial almost about views I expressed to you in the talk exchanges which were not actually part of the actual posted article it totally wrong. There is absolutely no reason why the anecdotes I posted but which have twice now been deleted should not be allowed. It is a disgrace. Curiously enough it is a somewhat faceless dilemma of the kind that Paddick himself was (and remains) faced with in relation to the machinations of Commissioner Ian Blair's failings - wikipedia seem to be batting for the wrong side on this one. This is a high profile article but that is not a good enough reason why quite straight-forward police related matters that may not be deemed one hundred percent to the credit of Lambeth policing while Paddick was commander should be supressed. Paddick is not GOD - or even Mayor -,not yet anyway. I think the post should be re-instated and would value asistance for that to happen. I certainly haven't contributed to the detriment of wikipedia in any of my postings - far from it. (----) TheGuntz. —Preceding unsigned comment added by --TheGuntz (talk) 22:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC)TheGuntz (talk • contribs) 03:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Discussion continued at Talk:Brian Paddick.

Tom Paddock

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Tom Paddock, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://paddickons.livejournal.com/tag/worcestershire. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I am the author of this page, and besides this is not a direct copy - I have been careful to make sure this article is both wikified and externally referenced outside of that page. -- Roleplayer (talk) 01:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

PS as evidence I have just altered the profile to grant permission for the text to be copied. -- Roleplayer (talk) 01:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

You can't grant Wikipedia sole permission to your materials; you must license your contribution under the GFDL. Please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials to see what this means and how you can confirm your licensure. Until you have done so, the article will be blank. — madman bum and angel 03:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Under Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials#Granting us permission to copy material already online:

you might also explicitly indicate somewhere on your site that Wikipedia has permission to use material from your site.

Which is exactly what I did. If this isn't good enough, then please have the common courtesy not to say that in your own policies. What exactly do you need me to say, and where? -- Roleplayer (talk) 03:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the confusion; that oversight will be corrected. The best procedure is to confirm that you agree to license the material under the GFDL, which means, among other things, that:

The text may be freely redistributed and used.
It may be freely modified, and modified versions may also be freely redistributed and used.
Any redistribution must include the full text of the GFDL itself.
In all cases, the GFDL requires proper attribution of the author(s).
The GFDL allows commercial re-uses provided such re-use is also under the GFDL.

You do not give up any of your rights to use the text: you are still free to publish the text elsewhere or to license the same text to other parties under any other license. The requirement to include the full text of the GFDL with any redistribution also makes stand-alone commercial reuse of the item unlikely in practice, incidentally.

I hope you don't begrudge this simple licensure we require to ensure that Wikipedia is and remains free content. :) — madman bum and angel 03:47, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Is this ok? (see note at bottom of page) -- Roleplayer (talk) 03:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely. Thank you for your time. — madman bum and angel 03:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Pinching ideas

Just thought I'd give the courtesy of letting you know I pinched this. I didn't think you'd mind, seeing as you pinched it yourself from someone else... -- Roleplayer (talk) 02:20, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

:-) it's been lifted from so many people in turn that it's becoming like a chain-letter. Regards, User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC).

Talk query

Talk query - why do the Talk exchanges that there have been between us in connection with the Brian Paddick article deletions - containing matters that are outstanding not appear as a matter of record on this Talk page? --TheGuntz (talk) 21:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Because the discussion didn't originate on my talk page, neither did you reply on my talk page. I only normally copy things across when one or the other happens. It is only in rare circumstances when I will copy across a whole conversation from another source. -- Roleplayer (talk) 21:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

So when are you going to reply to outstanding matters I have raised? And which presumably by now you will have seen.--TheGuntz (talk) 21:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I hadn't seen them actually. I deliberately stopped watching because it was stressing me out, and with my hospital visit yesterday stress is the last thing I need. I am willing to respond, but please be accepting of my honest response. -- Roleplayer (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)