User talk:Saint Michael 2010

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Saint Michael 2010! I am SilentBobxy2 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Silent Bob (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Freda Du Faur 01.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Freda Du Faur 01.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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:21, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! -129.49.72.78 (talk) 18:51, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to South Western Main Line, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:44, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Frederick Samson R. M. Fox

The article Frederick Samson R. M. Fox has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Mo ainm~Talk 17:47, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation at Robert Harrild

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions to the Robert Harrild article, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later, and under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribute Share-Alike."

You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question at the "Help Desk". You can also leave a message on my talk page. Lagrange 613 16:49, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Maggie Bird (curator) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Maggie Bird (curator) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maggie Bird (curator) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JoelWhy (talk) 12:03, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. When you recently edited Archibald Montgomerie, 13th Earl of Eglinton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Winton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 04:40, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Badbury Rings, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bath and Archaeological Institute (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 15 September 2012 (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) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Saint Michael 2010. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Saint Michael 2010. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Josiffe and Terry-Thomas

Okay, so you think that the reference from a national daily that says that NJ's wife was TT's sister is incorrect. What are your grounds for this? Or are you the anon on the Talk page? Deb (talk) 13:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, yes, they have got it wrong. The DNB (Dictionary of National Biography) http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-39948?rskey=Syrto8&result=1 correctly shows that nTerry Thomas was married to a Belinda Cunningham, whilst Scott was married to a lady named Myers. They were not sisters. The error comes from the book 'A Very English Scsandal' which erroneously showed Belinda to be 'Sue' Meyrs's sister.

Was there anything to say that neither Belinda nor Sue had been previously married? (Thus Cunningham or Myers could be married names.) Have you checked out the discussion at Talk:Norman Josiffe? Deb (talk) 13:48, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, neither was previously married, Belinda Cunningham was the daughter of Geoffrey Percy Cunningham, and Angela Mary Susan Myers was, according to some sources, the daughter of Henry J. Myers. They are not sisters. There may be some other connection, but the information from the Telegraph is simply wrong.

This editor is not the IP, no.

The Telegraph article (a review of the Penrose book) says that Terry-Thomas was the brother-in-law of Myer's sister (implying that Myer's sister was married to Terry-Thomas's brother). That may be right, but it would be good to get some independent confirmation.

Some of the books say plainly that Josiffe and Terry-Thomas were brothers-in-law. That implies that their wives - Susan Myers and Belinda Cunningham - were sisters. As we know, the women had different fathers (yes, one was Lt Col GP Cunningham, late RA; the other appears to be Captain Philip Edmund Leo Augustine Myers, late Gordons: who calls him "Henry"?).

But who was their mother? Both seem to have mothers called Nell Elizabeth, and her maiden name may be Thompson. So perhaps they were half-sisters? Unless you know different, and have sources to back that up?

Do join in the discussion at Talk:Norman Josiffe. 213.205.240.209 (talk) 19:13, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I shall add something to the 'talk' discussion.

You wrote: "I'm not really interested in a reply, just in seeing the Norman Josiffe page reverted to facts, rather than spurious claims based on a novel." The reason your edit was undone was because it did not follow the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view guideline - our most strictly-enforced guideline. Deb (talk) 10:04, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I left in the existing suggestion that Scott and Thomas were related, and showed a reference to a reliable source which would have mentioned it were it true; surely that balance is what the POV guideline requires. The notion of Terry Thomas being related to Norman Scott interesting, but factually incorrect. There is no reliable source claimed for it. The ultimate source is a novel and I have also given a reference to the biography about Terry Thomas (written with his help, during his lifetime, but published posthumously by his co-author). There is no mention there of Norman Josiffe/Scott as his brother-in-law. There have been all sorts of convoluted attempts to suggest a relationship between the two men - such as perhaps their wive's mothers being half-sisters. This is not the case, Myers mother was Myra O'Callaghan, who was born in Ireland, 1917 (the daughter of John Michael Callaghan and Ellen Mernagh); Cunningham's mother was an Australian Nell Elizabeth Thompson born in 1911 (the daughter of James Ambrose Thompson and Amy Edith Moses). Even if London born Myra and Australian Nell were maternal half-sisters, there is no version of 'sisters-in-law' that makes Terry Thomas related to Norman Josiffe through sisters-in-law. How can a detail in a novel be regarded as a sufficient reference for a Wikipedia article?Saint Michael 2010 (talk) 13:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Your contribution speculated on the motivation of those who repeated the statement that you believe to be untrue. To edit here you need to write down the facts as concisely as possible, not wander off into personal opinion. Deb (talk) 12:19, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, everybody else was right and I was wrong. I've just had sent through the will of Nell Elizabeth Myers and she talks about her grandson who would have been Diggory Benjamin W. Scott - Norman Scott's son, and her grandsons by Terry Thomas, Timothy and Rupert Stevens. Probate is dated 3rd November 2010, and as that means a will has been published, it is presumably a quotable source for Wikipedia. Off to buy some humble pie now.Saint Michael 2010 (talk) 15:06, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Saint Michael 2010. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Library of St. John the Beheaded

The article The Library of St. John the Beheaded has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 14:48, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Maggie Bird for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Maggie Bird is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maggie Bird until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mccapra (talk) 16:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Saint Michael 2010 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 85.115.52.202. This is a work place pc and we have recently had a change of IT systems. We used to be able to edit Wikipedia at work, but this may have changed, can you advise? Saint Michael 2010 (talk) 12:52, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That IP address belongs to Forcepoint Cloud and is functioning as a proxy. If you have no ability to disable it and plan on editing, WP:IPBE may be an option for you. Yamla (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Thank you for the advice.