User talk:Sarah777/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 13

Áed Sláine

Áed Sláine died 602 per McCarthy's synchronisms of the Irish annals.Timelinefrog (talk) 23:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Note that; but in the article Áed Sláine it says 604 and I think it was written by your good self! Sarah777 (talk) 01:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Nope - actually it was Angus; and somewhere else in a Wiki article (can't recall where) it is emphatic that 600 was the year he snuffed it! Sarah777 (talk) 01:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Angus relies on the Annals of Ulster for his chronology whereas the Annals of Tigernach chronology is more accurate. when in doubt I'd rely on Tigernach over Ulster.Timelinefrog (talk) 02:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Here is the reference from Tigernach under 602.2 "Iugulacio Aeda Slane o Conoll mac Suibne for bru Locha Semdighe" or if you prefer english "The slaying of Aed Sláine by Conall son of Suibne on the brink of Loch Semdid."Timelinefrog (talk) 02:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Should we change the date in Áed Sláine to 602 then? Any other errors like that that you may have spotted? Sarah777 (talk) 02:08, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I can tell from your edits you are a typical Irish citizen - very bitter about the past. I think that's why Ireland will always be seen as the cesspit of Western Europe - completely devoid of culture or even interesting history. Any achievement an Irishman has ever made has been done in England or with English help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.176.97.11 (talk) 02:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

whatever! irish christianized the english.guess the job wasn't completed.Timelinefrog (talk) 02:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

"completely devoid of culture or even interesting history"!!! LOL! England can't make cars without Japanese management, can't run a bank or even competently rescue on of its failures ... but it does makes good comedians. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, ignoring the above anglo-saxon bigotry, back to chronology. I will be sneaking a standard chronology into as many articles as I can. Hard to do with some of Angus' articles cause they are usually well written to begin with. I'll probably update Áed Sláine soon.Timelinefrog (talk) 02:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

He he! Probably an Admin working undercover! I guess as part of the years-in-Ireland series I'd be glad of a "most probable" date or a range if that isn't possible - don't really want to have these chaps dying two or three times! Sarah777 (talk) 02:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Agree about the comedians - I still think John Cleese is the best there has ever been! Sarah777 (talk) 18:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Succession boxes

Hi Sarah

Well done adding succession boxes to various kings ... but per Wikipedia:Guide to layout#Standard_appendices_and_descriptions, they should be located at the bottom of the article:

All succession boxes and navigational footers should go at the very end of the article, following the last appendix section, but preceding the "categories and interwiki links".

I have just moved a few boxes, but maybe you could note that guideline when adding more.

Keep up the good work! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

BHG - the boxes are great but they are not mine! User:Dimadick is the author. I'm still linking dates and tribal relatives. Sarah777 (talk) 18:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of 620 in Ireland

A tag has been placed on 620 in Ireland, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a foreign language article that was copied and pasted from another Wikimedia project, or was transwikied out to another project. Please see Wikipedia:Translation to learn about requests for, and coordination of, translations from foreign-language Wikipedias into English.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Mm40 _{Your Hancock Please} 18:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The only foreign language I can see is English - an ceart dom é a scriobh as Gaeilge? An sin a bhfuil tú ag iarradh? Sarah777 (talk) 18:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Kings of Brega

S.O.S! Calling Angus and TimeFrog - This list needs some serious attention! Sarah777 (talk) 21:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

This list is based on a poem in the book of leinster. there is no accurate list but it implies that the person was considered king of all brega at one time and not just a portion of it. Niall mac Cernaig Sotal for example was king only in southern brega. While Irgalach mac Conaing can be considerd king or overlord of all brega while ruling directly in north Brega. The rulers of Brega subdivided a lot. The Brega list is pretty sound but the South brega and north brega lists are not.Timelinefrog (talk) 22:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

corrected some, I'll keep working at it might take a while.Timelinefrog (talk) 22:19, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Angloism

I've noticed your comment at Sony's page. Is it possible? could I be subconsciously British programmed in my thinking? interesting. GoodDay (talk) 19:10, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

d. or died?

I'm using died now cause i saw angus using it a lot. no real reason, guess it just makes it obvious that d. means that. copying angus style seems to get better results for me so i guess i'll just follow in the man's footsteps.Timelinefrog (talk) 23:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

That's fine - so will I. That means folks will die before about 1500 and they will merely d. after that date! Sarah777 (talk) 23:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:MOSBIO prefers "died", though it's not necessarily referring to that context. Personally, I think that "died" is clearer. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you got a BOT that would change a few thousand of Ardferns dates?! Sarah777 (talk) 23:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It wouldn't be hard to do in AWB — just a matter of a regex to change \(d.\s+(\[\[[0-9]+ in Ireland\|[0-9]+\)) to (died $1, and the same for b./borned. — but right now I have no AWB cos I am without a Windoze PC :( But maybe I should ask at WP:BOTREQ? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow! - never knew you could speak such fluent Greek :) Sarah777 (talk) 00:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Hesperioi phelloi. ;) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

647 in Ireland

A tag has been placed on 647 in Ireland, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. RyRy5 talk 23:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Post '1949' in Ireland articles

Hello Sarah. I wonder should the articles after 1949 be split into '..in Republic of Ireland...' and '...in Northern Ireland...' articles. Shall we keep it geographical or go political? GoodDay (talk) 15:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

My expert on these matters, Dr Ardfern, maintains a Northern Ireland series separately. So the "Ireland" series post partition should either include or exclude that material - I'd say the most practical thing would be to call by event - is it clearly NI or RoI or does it have relevance to both? But I certainly wouldn't start a mega row by trying ti call the current "Ireland" series "Republic of Ireland". Or we'll end up with three series post 1949 and who knows - someone might try and start a "Years in the British Isles" series! Sarah777 (talk) 22:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I just had to be certain it was alright, to include the Monarchs of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. GoodDay (talk) 23:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

They should go into the NI section as clearly they are not monarchs of Ireland; and very few died in Ireland. Unfortunately. Sarah777 (talk) 23:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh Sarah, Sarah who never gives up, Sarah who holds fast the line. (I have no personal side in these debates.) I keep your page watchlisted because, whatever the event, it is always interesting, I always learn something, and you nearly always make me laugh. I got lucky tonight: two laughs, one in each of your two immediately preceding posts. Thank you. ៛ Bielle (talk) 01:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

! Sarah777 (talk) 01:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

And the Collection grows

It was the toothy grin that did it:

		The Barnstar of Good Humour
		To Sarah777, with thanks for many laughs, intentional or not. The world needs more laughter. ៛ Bielle (talk) 02:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Markreidyhp/Wiki_surprize

Wiki Surprize Draw

You have won the Irish Wikipedians surprise draw!! Just leave a message on my talk page to receive the prize of USD 1,000,000 or EUR 638,442.37 or GBP 505,871.414 Markreidyhp 07:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd never take money from someone who spells "surprise" with a "z".......Sarah777 (talk) 20:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• • I won too!!! I am just sending them all my personal details now. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

National Route Shields Finished

National Route Shields Finished. Will have to redo N1 to N33 excluding N21 for colour, but otherwise ok for now. Will do Regional Routes in time.

I've added the Shields to all the main articles for Primary and Secondary Routes Limbo-Messiah (talk) 12:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Rude?

I've copied this from Sony's page because we shouldn't be carrying on our debate over there

PS: Ya gotta admit though, your comments ...usual British nationlist cadre are out en force... & Did this, unease some British nationalist sentiment? Well, boo-hoo!... didn't help much. GoodDay (talk) 15:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

While Sony and myself have disagreed in the past on both the issue of "civility" and on editing I fear that there is now a trend of authoritarianism developing in the Wiki control rooms which is seeking to suppress a growing non-establishment world-view developing on Wiki - using civility as a weapon. I have actually recently had a number of senior (non-Irish) editors suggest (as I interpret their words) that remarks like ...usual British nationalist cadre are out en force... could lead to blocks and bans of the most draconian nature. It is a pretty common view outside the UK/US mainstream (even occasionally shared by non-rebels such as Sony), that what passes for NPOV in Wiki is merely the cultural assumptions of the "non-colonised" section of the Anglophone world (ie US, UK, Australia, NZ, Canada and other assorted headlands and islands left over from the Empire). I have been studying some of the similar rows increasingly shaping the India-related articles; which pits those who have Anglo v Indian views of the Raj into rapidly separating camps. This obviously, when you consider the potential numbers, isn't going down too well in "British Nationhalist" circles! Sarah777 (talk) 18:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

What you're trying to do is assume the role of eternal victim, and compare the Irish to oppressed native peoples such as the American Indians and Aborigines. In fact, the Irish benefited from the British Empire just as much as the Welsh and Scots, perhaps even more son, and themselves formed a large percentage of the colonisers of those aforementioned natives. Hence the high percentage of people of Irish descent in the former colonies today, blatantly living on land stolen from those very same natives. TharkunColl (talk) 08:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting to hear you state that the land was stolen from the natives. Are you going to put that into any articles sometime soon? Or will this sentiment and language only be used for painting the past of everybody else except the British? Sounds to me like you're agreeing with Himhifi below... Bardcom (talk) 11:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Himhifi below seems to be very proud of the fact that India is a democracy. So where did they get that from then, I wonder? As for the stealing of land from people such as the American Indians and Aborigines, the bulk of that was done, I'm afraid, after the British were no longer in control. Proof of the fact that the British did not treat the Irish in such a fashion is the fact that the Irish still exist. TharkunColl (talk) 11:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Is is possible? am I & other editors subconsiously British programed? GoodDay (talk) 18:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Anything is possible but I'd not claim be be able to make a call on any individual subconscious! Obviously many editors are very consciously "nationalist" - Exhibit A - myself!! But certainly the standards for NPOV which are accepted by the "community" are manifestly biased in favour of the classic liberal Anglo-American mainstream views. For obvious reasons.

This only becomes a serious issue when it runs into a very different perspective in places like Ireland (where it can be suppressed) and increasingly India - where the potential for current Wiki "community" consensus to be radically overhauled is great. (Non-English speaking countries generally are developing their own-language Wikis so the debate on EN Wiki regarding them is effortlessly dominated by the EN mainstream and the debate, while often heated, falls within the parameters of its Western left v right context). Sarah777 (talk) 19:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It's tricky, many have to remember this is the 'English (language) Wikipedia' & not 'English (England) Wikipedia'. The world is just too politically correct & sensative. GoodDay (talk) 19:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Coming from the UK, it feels to me a lot like the 'American wikipedia' on here sometimes.:) special, random, Merkinsmum 21:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed MerkinOnParis Merkinsmum; there are 300 million Americans and they vastly outnumber the rest of the non-Indian Anglophone world put together. Which is why I don't see Wiki as a "community" in any real sense. Its about as meaningless as the term "International Community" as used in the Anglophone Western media - where it is merely a phrase that means "the US, UK, Australia, Canada and some allies". If you observe the context it is used in by the Anglophone media it often refers to a group of countries representing no more than 10% of the global population! EN:Wiki is heavily infected with the same mindset. Sarah777 (talk) 23:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The Future of Wiki?

This is a recent exchange I've lifted from the talkpage of the British Raj article:

What you are writing is your POV it has nothing to do with the reality, Wikipedia is the serious project it can't be used for glorifying colonialism, Racism, fascism, slavery, starvation, misery, economic destruction and crimes against humanity which has lead to destruction of sub-continent. British Empire is collapsed by the burden of misery of death and destruction it has brought in the life of millions of people around the Globe. Billion of dollars are stolen from India and you are telling, it was all right for them to steal money from India, what a joke? Millions of people are killed and you are telling it was all right for them to kill in order to rule and suppress people. British was the main architect of the partition of the country and it has done irreversible damage leading to millions of death. You are telling it was right to live like a second class citizen in your own land, this is also your POV and goes against the policy of any modern nation in the world. The construction work in India was done keeping in mind their long term objectives in the sub-continent. They built those things for their own purpose and better exploitation of the resources, because they had thought that they would rule India forever. Same way as they are ruling the stolen land of Australia, Canada & Newzealand (Now Independent but mostly British). Where the percentage of Indigenous people was too low and genocide was too high to offer strong resistance to the criminal Empire. Did you want to bring Indians on the verge of extinction like Australian Aborigines who are suffering death, disease and poverty in their own country at the hands of descendants of British.

British Raj was overwhelmingly bad for India and can't be justified or glorified for whatever reasons. In today's India the largest and most successful democracy even a Muslim can become a president (Abdul Kalam) and Sikh can become Prime Minister(Manmohan Singh) that is not possible in UK any time soon, so stop spreading untruth about India. --User:Himhifi 09:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Himhifi YOU STOP. with your Indian Nationalism, which i find highly offensive. take your debate to your other propaganda websites and stop inflicting your personal hatred on this Encloypedia with your continual anti-British senterment. User:Rockybiggs (talk) 09:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Now - what does that exchange remind you of?! Sarah777 (talk) 19:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

There certainly is a common anti-UK thread on Wikipedia, over past treatment of ancestors by the British Empire. GoodDay (talk) 19:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It reminds me of a (not very sophisticated) exchange from a political discussion board, of which Wikipedia is not. Rockpocket 19:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Nah Rock - I see one editor seeking to improve the article and another resisting. Perspective again? Sarah777 (talk) 19:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Bu there lay the dilema - Who's trying to improve the article & who's resisting? GoodDay (talk) 19:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Seeing as there is nothing in that exchange the specifically addresses anything in any article, its hard to see what is being improved. This an en example of exactly how not to address systemic bias in the Encyclopaedia. I'm sure there are some basis for his concerns, but by couching them in such rhetoric he undermines himself. The retort isn't much better, though. Rockpocket 20:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd have an open mind on the 'undermining' issue - I can foresee a time (not far distant) when Himhifi's views will be accepted as the community norm as fully as a particular (not universal) view on civility is now. (Actually, the retort is far worse). Sarah777 (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Its not either view that is the problem, its the way they are expressed. Rockpocket 05:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Now Rock - you must be familiar with the notion that "the medium is the message"? Just like Special Fred, excessive linearity can lead to walking into walls! Sarah777 (talk) 01:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

First Regional Route Shield Done

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R113_road

Check it out and tell me what you think before I go and do moreLimbo-Messiah (talk) 17:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks good Limbo - apologies for delay in replying I'm out of town for a few days. Sarah777 (talk) 23:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Lotto and Grand National - let's do it together - split it 50/50

Will you be back in time for Saturday's Lotto? I'm eager to cash in. Your precognition powers [1] appear to be working [2]. And if you're back in time for the Grand National, even better? What do you think of the chances of Bewleys Berry? --Bardcom (talk) 18:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Bewleys Berry is the scientists choice - each way bet I'd say. Think of the RfC as a rite of passage - I'll read the bumf and see what horrible Wiki-crimes you are accused of. Sarah777 (talk) 03:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Bewleys Berry came fifth - pays 3/1. And he lead up to the last couple of fences. Such is life. Sarah777 (talk) 11:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Aughavannagh

Would you like to give me a hand fleshing out my draft of Aughavannagh which is currently located here? ww2censor (talk) 23:14, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

It is so remote that inhabitants say that Aughavannagh is the last place God made. Steady! I'll refer to my book on the Military Road "The Wicklow Military Road - history and topography" (2007) by Michael Fewer" and see if it has any Aughavannaghian nuggets that your refs have missed. Sarah777 (talk) 03:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, anything you can find, especially about the village (a few houses) itself, not just the barracks. I took a pic the last time I drove by and will add when I get the time to upload it. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 03:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually upon checking some other sources I see that i have spelled it incorrectly. It should be Aghavannagh, though I do have a copy of Liam Price's The Place-Names of Co. Wicklow and I will add some ref to the different spellings and sources he quotes. A gerat but rare set of booklets published in 1946, but unfortunately he only did County Wicklow. ww2censor (talk) 18:13, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Flann Sinna

Sarah, sorry if my quick revert seemed rude; it wasn't meant to be. I should probably have left a talk-page message rather than relying on the edit summary; sorry about that.

Personally I'm not a fan of the "year in <political/geographical entity>" approach; I understand good-faith opinions can differ on this, but I don't think it's a very effective way of providing historical context. Last time these were added I did ask on the talk page first, and Angus agreed that they weren't a big asset, so I cut them.

I think your plan of filling them in first is reasonable. When you think there's enough content in them to make it worth re-adding some of the links, could I suggest you raise the idea on the talk page at Flann Sinna? That way we can get consensus on which links are useful before making any edits. Mike Christie (talk) 18:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

That's fine Mike. I was going to revert the Flann Sinna links myself when I saw the extent of the red links - I haven't dragged myself into the 10th century yet! Sarah777 (talk) 18:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Schull

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. What do yez think? Sarah777 (talk) 20:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

You listed the townlands...looks very detailed. I'm in two minds whether I love it or hate it....I think I love it. I'd like to see more history and a detailed map. The townland list is long - might be better if it went into a table for neatness? Bardcom (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Good God man! I didn't list them - I was horrified by them! :) Sarah777 (talk) 22:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

If the article way about 5 or 6 screens full, perhaps one could get away with such a list but at this stage, with just 2 paragraphs, it really add nothing other than clutter to it. ww2censor (talk) 22:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Ohmigod. "C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre."

Yes, it does overwhelm the article. (I didn't know there were so many townlands in Schull; the list makes it look like every stone betwen Mt Garbriel and Long Island is in its own townland. If it just listed the names, I'd be comfortable about deleting it, but the fact that it includes an explanation of the names makes it more informative ... but it has two terminal deficiencies. First, no map or anything else to give any idea of where in the area those townlands are (I can place a lot of them from memory, but that's not much use to most readers). Second, no references, which seems to me to be a fatal flaw.

Checking histories, I note that the list was added two years ago in these edits by Durrus (talk · contribs) ... and in that I see that Durrus did add a reference. So how about splitting this out to a standalone List on townlands in Schull? Still no locations, but I think it's worth keeping for the names. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Or the Townlands of Schull! I see it appears that Durrus (or someone) was going to write an article on Mount Gabriel but never got around to it. Sarah777 (talk) 08:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Snap, crackle and POP!

Dear Marjorie,

What has happened? The other day I logged on and every link I ran the mouse over produced a pop-up. Had never even seen one before. How did this happen? Did I turn in on by accident?

Your, Distressed, Sarah777 (talk) 07:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

You are around

I was going to ask you to look at this guy's edits but saw you had not been working since April Fool's Day, so that fooled me, so I did not ask. Maybe you were out checking that guy's edit statements in person. I reverted a couple and someone else got the rest. You are good on the Irish geographical stuff, so maybe keep an eye on the articles he has been working on, if they are not on that very short watchlist of yours. Mine is now at 500! Cheers ww2censor (talk) 23:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ww - yes, this is a brief look-in far from home! Checking up on y'all. I see your man has "Special-T" on his case who described the offending edits as rambling uncited ungrammatical edits. The new me would eschew such language but, on the other hand, I'd not disagree with Mr T atall atall. And yep; my tiny watchlist picked up every single one of his recent Irish edits I'm happy to report! (Just that I wasn't watching the watchlist the past few days). Sarah777 (talk) 00:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Have a good one! ww2censor (talk) 00:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Have done the first batch, but no articles for all of them.

Limbo-Messiah (talk) 21:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey! Many thanks - great work. Sarah777 (talk) 23:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Response to query

It can be difficult sometimes to catch up with the history behind people's interactions who've been here a long time. A good way to do it is to put the username of those individuals into {{usercheck}} in a sandbox. So, for example, supposing you wanted to know a little bit about the very productive and quite indispensable User:Dbachmann, and were perplexed as to why so many people always seem angry at him, putting his name into the template gives you Dbachmann (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks), where you can click on any of the links, especially those for his rfa, the rfcs and the arbs to know what trouble people have tried to get him into in the past. I find this sort of information helps one to understand conversations that might otherwise not make sense. Another possible method is to google someone's username and look at where they've contributed a lot, but remember to limit your results to site:en.wikipedia.org, because otherwise you might get results you seriously do not want. --Relata refero (disp.) 19:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Re your comment about MONGO's edit count compared to Tango's on WP:ANIO

Well, what do you expect? It's way too easy to become an admin around here. I considered the entire admin process a joke from the first time I found out a 14 year old was one. Jtrainor (talk) 23:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I know of a very bright 12 year old with attitude around here and after a couple of edits on, say, Aston Villa and Nascar he could apply for Adminship. He'd certainly have a lot more to offer the community than some of the current crop - having a positive attitude and all that! Sarah777 (talk) 23:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Final warning

Hi Sarah - good to hear from you - with you and BHG watching there's not much chance of me being a miscreant - on with the work. Thanks.Ardfern (talk) 18:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Red Flag flying...

Dunno about that... They know how to keep the Red Flag flying down in Ballydehob... :O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 03:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmm. I do hope that you are not the IP vandal - should I call for a CheckUser?! And I'd guess the flag is red and white! Sarah777 (talk) 03:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks very much for adding an appropriate caption under M50 picture. For the last one month, I am trying hard to take an appropriate picture of that junction staying in 74 moving bus. Somehow I could manage this one but still not satisfied. I will update it with a better one soon. Cheers. -- Niaz^{(Talk • Contribs)} 09:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Glad to hear the Number 74 bus is moving. Normally when I pass through there I could set up a tripod and click between the occasional traffic moves of a few feet forward! Sarah777 (talk) 21:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Ireland

I support the reunification of Ireland, but the simple fact of the matter is that the state you refer to is the Irish Republic/Twenty Six Counties, not Ireland/Eire. The nation is Ireland/Eire, and takes in the Six Counties/Northern Ireland as well.--MacRusgail (talk) 13:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, if wrong in relation to name of the the State. And doesn't the island contain two nations; the smaller nation constituting about half the population of the NI statelet (or failed entity if you prefer)? Also, out of curiosity - why do you mention it here? Sarah777 (talk) 22:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

British Isles

Hello Sarah. I see you're locking horns with 'yet' another Administrator. You're a tough gal. GoodDay (talk) 23:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

When I first locked horns with Ben (nothing serious I may add) he wasn't one! Are the Unionist editors taking to arming themselves? Sarah777 (talk) 00:02, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I mean Administrator Deacon. GoodDay (talk) 00:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmmmmm. Don't think I know him...how did our horns become entwined?? Sarah777 (talk) 00:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Oops, I meant at talk: British Isles; concerning the removing/re-adding of a posting by another editor. GoodDay (talk) 00:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm with you now - I think of him as Diazapam in my mind-files; missed the "Deacon" bit! Sarah777 (talk) 00:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I though I was the only one who thought of DoP that way! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, the material you are reinserting has nothing to do with the topic. It is a personal post regarding User:TharkunColl, clear baiting and has no business on an article talk page. Please see Wikipedia:DISCUSSION#How_to_use_article_talk_pages Keep on topic: Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject (much less other subjects). Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal. Continued reinsertion of it will constitute WP:DISRUPTION. Please, I'm just enforcing good policy here, and don't want to have to issue blocks over this. Besides being policy, you should be able to figure out for yourself that such a post can lead nowhere good when posted on article talks. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

OK Deek, I missed the bit that you were just enforcing policy. Obviously, not wishing to be blocked, I'd never stand in the way of the Law - even it was an Ass (which of course it isn't in this case). Sarah777 (talk) 00:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding. With regards to your mental files, read if you have the inclination Umberto Eco's Baudolino and picture all the wonderful creatures of Pndapetzim. Don't really like being associated with Diazepam ... not at my youthful age at least. ;) Regards,

I think it's the "Deacon of" does it! Sarah777 (talk) 01:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Nelson's Pillar

Your recent contribution(s) to Wikipedia are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at How to cite sources. Thanks! --AW (talk) 15:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

No idea what you are talking about - but I fixed that Nelson's Pillar mess for you. Regards Sarah777 (talk) 19:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

This isn't a warning, it's the basic {{needsource}} template - the template says "first level warning" in it, I didn't add that, and I hardly think it's uncivil. That's the usual way to say why you shouldn't add unsourced things, and it provides links to the various Wikipedia guidelines. It was in reference to this edit and your later ones: [3]. To me, that adds a lot of opinion without adding any sources for the opinion, such as "causing painfully-amused Dubliners to roll their eyes and joke about how the authorities 'should have got the original boys back to finish the job'." If there are references for them, by all means add them, but so far three users, including myself, have taken them out because they're unsourced, and I think that's the right thing to do. --AW (talk) 15:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The remarks are factually correct; most of the rest of the text is unreferenced - why pick on a few sentences? Is there a reason other than concern for "verifiability"? One of the "three" (whose edit I reverted) commented "Gloriously sycophantic, indulgent and unsubstantiated. IRA folklore" in his deletion of the information. Hardly a WP:NPOV edit. Sarah777 (talk) 23:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Why didn't they just take Lord Nelson down (not that he did any harm to the Irish and is part of our countries' shared heritage) and put Bernardo O'Higgins up there instead? They'd have preserved a nice streetscape whilst making their rather dubious political point. As it is, the attractive parts of Georgian Dublin that the dynamite enthusiasts haven't destroyed have been bulldozed by the City Corporation. Is there any city in Western Europe with worse public sculpture?! --Major Bonkers (talk) 14:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think it was good to remove the pillar as well. It had serious aesthetic issues and looked incongruous in that location - pug ugly even. The Spire is a vast improvement. However, as a gesture to our "shared" heritage and in order to "reach out" to our former genocidal occupiers I'd be prepared to consider impaling a replica of Nelson's head on the top of the Spire. Sarah777 (talk) 18:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Ha, ha - I love your answers, Sarah! Actually, I can think of several people that I'd like to see with a spire up their fundament - we might even agree on some of them (Ian Paisley?). On the other hand, I feel that if the Poles can restore their Zygmunt's Column, perhaps the Irish might again take pride in their - now sadly lost - magnificent erection, whoever's on the top of it. --Major Bonkers (talk) 20:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Bonkers, you do have a gift for lowering the tone of any cultural exchange. This Zygmunt chappie appears to be Polish so why wouldn't the plain patriotic people of Poland proudly protect his pedestal? Sarah777 (talk) 07:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

But why wouldn't the doughty Dubliners dauntlessly defend and - er - dum-de-dum. O bugger it - you win! --Major Bonkers (talk) 09:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Simple English Wikipedia

Hi, an account with your name was created on Simple English Wikipedia earlier. Was it you? If it wasn't, you may like to usurp it to prevent further imposters. Cheers, Majorly (talk) 00:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Certainly not me - how do I usurp?? Sarah777 (talk) 02:12, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk to User:Creol over on Simple - he's a 'crat and may be able to help - Alison ^❤ 02:37, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I can't even log on to Simple Wiki 'cos I don't know 'my' password! I left Creol a message. Sarah777 (talk) 02:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I left a followup over there, too. Hopefully, he'll do the three accounts, fingers crossed - Alison ^❤ 03:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

New Chestnuts

I have been amusing myself creating meanings for the chestnut photos. I am not sure that I have latched on to the one you intended, but I suppose that doesn't really matter. The photos are lovely in themselves. So, which one(s), I wonder, would make the best conkers? ៛ Bielle (talk) 00:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

• (butting in) So, which one(s), I wonder, would make the best conkers? Generally the ones that are hollowed out and have a ball-bearing inside, if memory serves me right. :O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 00:52, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I never played the game personally as it wasn't a young ladies pastime - but my understanding is that the ballbearing trick is more likely to destroy your own conker than the opponents; according to Conkers, the Wiki article from which I took the photos, the winningest nuts are those caressed with baby lotion. A lesson there for you Mr Flowerpot. As for the meaning of the photos Bielle, well, there isn't any I'm afraid - I thought the Admin thingy was getting a bit stale and I fancied the conkers! Sarah777 (talk) 02:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

"but my understanding is that the ballbearing trick is more likely to destroy your own conker than the opponents" It's a bit late to tell me that NOW. However, I submit that compared to the lotion method, the ball-bearing solution is more technically sophisticated.... - and, well... more manly. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 02:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

'Twas the contents of the cranium separated man from monkey Mr Flowerpot. Science supports baby lotion. Did you ever play marbles, or glassyallys as you Corkonians might say? Sarah777 (talk) 12:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Not being a Corkonian (*cough*) and not being familiar with their strange ways, I didn't know that they called them glassallys, but on the other end of the N20, we called them dobbers. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 22:49, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Oddly, in both West Wicklow and Dublin we called them "marbles". Never drilled one out and inserted ball bearings though there were metal ones if I recall. Probably called "metlars" - though I cannot remember. Sarah777 (talk) 23:14, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I seem to recall that an elder member of the Flowerpot family, who was from points east (in the Dublin area), referring to marbles as mebs. But metallers was the term used in Limerick for the ball bearing type all right. (With the obvious caveat that the youth of today possibly would only encounter a marble on a trip to a museum, but in the 70's, when buses were orange, metaller was the term used. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 01:11, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Ireland

Sarah, forgive me, my English is poor. I came across your contributions about Ireland and this country being a part of the British Isles or not. It 's a pity that some people have trouble recognising what really happened. Flanders has also been occupied by Spain, Austria etc. You and the Irish have my sympathy. Thundercloud (talk) 06:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Paul - sorry for the delay but when I saw this I suspected a troll! My Dutch is way worse than your fine English! Sarah777 (talk) 10:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Gebruikersboxen

Paul bezoekt graag het Verenigd Koninkrijk.

constituent country

i see you withdrew your backing for it to be renamed last time, due to lack of support. I am now supporting, with the suggested name change to "constituent area". I have left many links here to show Wales is not a country, but a "principality", and if you could hopefully bring back any of those links that you found, that show N.Ireland as a province, and not a country, that would be helpful too. :) Gozitancrabz (talk) 11:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Simple English username

Your request has been completed. Creol (talk) 10:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Sarah777 (talk) 12:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

You seem to have found out on your own. Cheers, Majorly (talk) 13:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

You should now go and register to prevent this happening again. Thanks, Majorly (talk) 13:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Can't register - "username already in use". And can't log in "wrong password". Sarah777 (talk) 16:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Check your email. Alison created the account for you, and sent the password by email. Majorly (talk) 17:02, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Ooops! I lost my MS Outlook programme so I can't find the message (though I should be able to find it on gmail (all the spam can). Are you sure it has been sent? I've changed my email to the gmail version so maybe try again. Sarah777 (talk) 17:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Small world. I see Vk's name has also been registered on Simple. So, no prizes for guessing who the culprit is I guess? Sarah777 (talk) 17:30, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

The culprit is actually Johnny the Vandal (JtV) and he's a rather prolific interwiki vandal. I doubt if you know him :) BTW - check your eircom account - the one that starts with "b". Your password should be in there (I hope!) - Alison ^❤ 18:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Can't see it - can you re-send? Sarah777 (talk) 19:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

That is - I can't find the message at all. Sarah777 (talk) 19:14, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Garbage deleted - my civility advisor has pointed out that this attempt at humour may be hurtful to the good folk involved in the project so I expunge it with apologies. Sarah777 (talk) 06:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Seriously? You have a civility advisor?  :-) Tell me you're joking....

I've also looked at the simple wikipedia, and I have to say that I share your initial sentiment. --Bardcom (talk) 10:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Bard, my civility advisor is User:Rockpocket. And Rock came to me in a dream and told me to delete it. As civility hereon is a "makey-up" notion to facilitate Admin-abuse I take guidance from those who have climbed the greasy Wiki-pole! I know that at first glance Simple appears odd; but taste is a very personal thingy. Sarah777 (talk) 22:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

LOL. I felt a blip in the Wiki-Force and sent civil thoughts from 11km above the Pacific. And it worked!! Therefore there will be no more on-wiki warnings for you, Miss. All admin abuse advice shall henceforth be perpetrated entirely by the power of thought. Rockpocket 05:58, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

11k up, eh? So that explains the strong signal :) Sarah777 (talk) 21:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

←Sarah, did you get a gmail message from me yet? - Alison ^❤ 23:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Oooops! Edit conflict...I'll check. Sarah777 (talk) 23:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Nope. Niet. Zilch. Zippo. Sarah777 (talk) 08:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Ooops. Kittybrewster ☎ 10:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. Sarah777 (talk) 10:51, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Substed banners

Just a quick note to point you to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland#Substituted_banners, just so youse knows why substing some template isn't aapproporiate :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

I have no recollection of substituting any template! Sarah777 (talk) 17:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

There's a bundle of them at the top of this contribs list. I guess that maybe you were doing it like I do, pasting in the same thing into several talk pages, and that somehow a subst prefix made it way into the first one and thereby got replicated.

Anyway, however it happened, it's all now fixed :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah! Appears I have been at it since 1st July last year - but the good news is I stopped doing it on 28th March. I remember I added "WikiSchoolsProject" tags to various lighthouses once by that same method. I have a reputation around here for sloppiness which I have to maintain..... (*_~) Sarah777 (talk) 05:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Sarah, but your reputation for sloppiness is sunk without trace. Your reputation is as a prolific editor with a non-zero edit rate, which just proves that you are not a bot :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Pooter

You don't think he could mean 'poofter', do you? --Major Bonkers (talk) 16:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I guess if he is trying to evade the Wiki Thought Police he just might! Sarah777 (talk) 21:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Err, no, Pooter I think, but there's also a pooter. Live and learn, no? Anyway, will you be turning Mór Muman into brilliant prose? Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes - we sorted the various pooters out on the Vk talkpage. I'll certainly add some links to Mr Muman Mór (why is the name backwards?????) - you know my MO by now :) Sarah777 (talk) 21:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hiya Buffy

When I saw this comment from the vampire slayer, I thought for a moment that you were about to make a permanent change of ID! But even before I moused over, the link I did recognise it as you. :)

FWIW, I think that the last AFD debate was instructive. There was a clear consensus that a "list of massacres" is a nonsense, and bare tolerance for a List of events named massacres. But I don't think you need worry too much, because if it is moved back to the old name, there are lots of editors ready to send it to AFD so fast it'll hardly touch ground. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:52, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

No BHG - since at least Victorian (ugh) times 'Sarah' has been the most or second most common (behind Mary till 1960) name in Ireland. It is especially common name in our tribe (Irish branch) since the great genocide and while I'd shed the 7s if I could usurp the current holder of the pure form - "Buffy" sounds too much like the name of a domestic cat. I guess PBS just had a rush of water to the brain and I was trying to pump it back out! Didn't they used to drill holes in the cranium of mad-folk in olden days? Sarah777 (talk) 09:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

They did indeed drill holes, but then in the olden days they used to issue documents like this, so things haven't all gotten worse ...

BTW, I regard cats as one of the highest forms of life, and want to be reincarnated as one if I have to come back here again, but each to their own :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm cool with cats and one of the several that hangs out here is called "Fluffy" hence my feelings on "Buffy"! I am not myself the cat - collector but aside from some (minor) concern for the local birdlife I might even feed them one a month if they got too scrawny lookin' - :) Sarah777 (talk) 23:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks like I'd better scrub the idea that when I'm reincarnated as a cat I can come scrounge some fish off you :( --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:54, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Vanishing

Sarah, just a courtesy note before I vanish. Thanks for the interesting talk (however terse it was at times between us). Take care and good luck. --sony-youth^pléigh 20:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah..Sony. Nothing serious I hope? Our wee spats never really amounted to anything lasting or serious - you'll be a big loss to the IrlProject. We aren't all that numerous. Very best in the future whatever you do. Meant very sincerely. Sarah F. Sarah777 (talk) 20:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Sony's vanishment has become a transformation, I think. GoodDay (talk) 23:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep. All a bit curious! Sarah777 (talk) 00:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Cup

Hi - what was that edit about? It is standard form on football articles that "most successful side" means the side that has won it the most. Why are you backing up the edits of an IP that has caused havoc across various European football articles? Black Kite 00:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

• OK, I see why you might have reverted there - but if so, you picked up a disruptive editor's edits and put them back (basically, he's been reverting forever - so it seems - that Juventus are the most successful UEFA side ever, because 3 sides have won it 3 times, but Juventus have reached more finals). Ta, Black Kite 00:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep; there was a snafu issue with the infobox that...eh...I fixed by reverting through several edits. BTW; I am reliably informed that Aston Villa are the most greatest best ever club in the universe. Sarah777 (talk) 01:15, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

image conscious

"Image:DilophosaurusByPhilKonstantin.jpg" deletion & moved to Commons

I can only guess you "re-filed" my photo for some Wikipedia reason. Whatever... You changed some of the info in the description which is inappropriate. You eliminated the Location = Red Fleet Dinosaur Tracks Park, Utah You changed my name from Phil Konstantin to Philkon. Please return the location field and return my name to my rightful name: Phil Konstantin. Had I wanted it listed as Philkon, I would have listed it that way. Phil Konstantin (talk) 03:07, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

A bit image conscious is our Phil - he he! :) Sarah777 (talk) 23:41, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

==

I have donated my photos for free. I would appreciate my name being spelled correctly. If that is being image conscious, then I am. My daughter's name is Sarah. She doesn't like it when people spell it Sara. I guess it runs in the family.

Phil Konstantin (talk) 15:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC) Phil Konstantin (talk) 16:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ooops...my apologies...actually I hate the spelling "Sara" too. Point taken. Sarah777 (talk) 19:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello again

Away from the 'community discussion' (= telling each other to 'fuck off') on AN/I, I came across this poignant story which I thought you might be interested in, as it involves one of your/ our own: RAF crewman to be buried after 67 years. It's rather a hidden piece of history, I always think; those Irishmen who enlisted to fight against Hitler, air-brushed from both countries' histories. Yours, --Major Bonkers (talk) 17:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Bonk - It isn't likely I'd spot something in The Telegraph in the normal run of things! Pleased with the UK local election results I'd wager? Sarah777 (talk) 19:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

'Bonk' - ? I'd never thought about my name that way before (or is it a Freudian slip on your part?!). The Poles have a good, if glib, phrase for when they go and intervene in someone else's argy-bargy: For your freedom and ours.

Actually, I have a pretty low opinion of politicians in general: ultimately, all politics, it seems to me, is about raising taxes; if one lot promises to rob Peter to pay Paul, you're bound to get all the Paul-ites voting in favour and all the Peter-ites voting against. Here's another picture of two famous Pooters (not sure about the one in the middle - the moustache and peculiar clothing incline me to believe that it might be three): [4]. --Major Bonkers (talk) 01:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Lol!! Sarah777 (talk) 07:02, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Any ideas?

here Giano (talk) 18:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll read and reflect Giano; my biggest handicap here is that I know absolutely nothing about boxing and what potential it has for Irish-related troubles. Sarah777 (talk) 19:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Zenit/Rangers Can of worms

Hi - I can understand your reaction to the anon remark, but please try not to bring in the old Rangers/Celtic stuff into the debate - Rangers have given up on their no-Catholic signing policy for more than 20 years, and it's not really relevant to whether Advocaat made the remarks alleged or the accusations of Marseille players on abuse of black players. Just a friendly word, which you can heed or not, as you see fit :) Camillus 23:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I've zero interest in either Celtic or Rangers; just the irony of the demonisation of Zenit by the British media left one breathless. You think the average Neanderthal supporting any British team differs much from his St Petersburg equivalent? I doubt it. Sarah777 (talk) 23:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't doubt that even the magnificent Aston Villa have the odd racist primate supporting them. And, apparently, I'm going to watch them play in the Autumn! Sarah777 (talk) 23:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ping!

You have (urgent) mail. I'm going to bed now, but I'll be able to answer your questions in about 8 hours. Rockpocket 08:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

County Longford

Hi - I'm sorry you needed to take the "I know best" attitude to my update. I wasn't "messing" when I created the gallery, I was going to add more images and in the process hopefully encourage others to do the same. The Images section was to cover contributions that had cultural and historical significance - not just geographic. I'm new to this but when you've been around a long time is it acceptable to just slash and burn the contributions of others as "messing" or is there a more diplomatic way - I'm sure you know best. Regards, Rick Rickrocksoz (talk) 22:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County template

I take exception to your blanking of this template page; the county has its own page, its own county council page, and so there is absolutely no reason why it shouldn't have its own template. That it is an administrative county as opposed to a traditional one is irrelevant.

In any case, with your experience here, you should know that simply blanking a page in any circumstances is unacceptable. If you really believe the template should be deleted, then list it at WP:TfD, where there can be a discussion about it. Thanks. --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 18:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Schambo is right. Discuss it on the talk page or take it to TfD if you want to, but blanking a page is not acceptable behaviour, and I'm very surprised to see an experienced editor like Sarah777 doing that. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:20, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool downs folks. I zapped the template because it looked like it has been hijacked from some American template and blindly popped into DL. The categorisation of areas in DL in the template is utter rubbish - Glencullan, Shankhill as major urban areas and Blackrock etc "villages with less than 1,000 people"? If you want to add templates they should have a certain minimum standard. Why not just plonk a "Planets of the Solar System" or "Asian City-states" template onto DL? Would be damn near as good a fit as this nonsense? Bah. On a technical issue I thought that as the "blanked" page was only affecting the DL article I was merely editing the article; not blanking a page in the page-blanking sense. In future I'll just remove it from the article and you'll kindly not restore it until it is fixed. Sarah777 (talk) 04:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I've tried to fix the template but can't eliminate all the nonsense. Are there more of these? If so, and if they aren't fixed I'll zap them on sight. You have 48 hours to clean them up. That's fair enough. Before I became excessively WP:CIVIL I'd have already released the Bot. Sarah777 (talk) 07:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

... Er, ok... Anyway - just dropped by to say that renaming a link to a template, as you did on the DL-Rathdown article, results in a redlink and no template appearing. You need to go to the template and (assuming its not going to be a controversial move) move it to the correct title, then change the links on any page using the template to point to the renamed template. I've moved this template to 'County Dl-R' from 'Dl-R County' and changed its heading text. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 11:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Replied at Template talk:Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County. By the way, what do you mean it was "hijacked from some American template"? You were aware that I created the original template last year ;) --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 15:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Apologies Schambo - I didn't realise you created it. But that means you can fix it, no?? Sarah777 (talk) 13:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sarah777, I'm sorry: I have just examined Template:Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County more closely, and you were quite right to blank it ... so I have now blanked it again. See discussion at Template talk:Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County, where we could do with your input! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Least there be any confusion folks - I have no issue whatever with DL having a County template - just one that fits. Sarah777 (talk) 13:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

VintageKits

Interesting ... User:Giano/Terms for VK's return Didn't think that admins had this sort of power.... --Bardcom (talk) 19:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

They do, and you are now banned for even questioning it.... I jest of course. Giano isn't an admin, all he has done is propose a set of conditions, under which Vk may be permitted to edit again, for the community to decide upon. You are free to wield the same power, should you have a proposal. Rockpocket 22:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I was just going to point out that Giano isn't an Admin - I think he is trying his best to get Vk back - you can see the strength of the opposition. Sarah777 (talk) 13:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism at Clonmel

I've tried to fix the intrusion as I believe you have too. Could you have another look please at Other People Of Note . My attempts to edit seem to delete whole tracts. Thanks.RashersTierney (talk) 23:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Tweaked it a bit and removed the vandalism....it seems OK now. Sarah777 (talk) 23:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks ! Personally, I'm not so cracked about that flappin' bird though RashersTierney (talk) 00:07, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

It flaps meaningfully....Sarah777 (talk) 00:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't we all...RashersTierney (talk) 00:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

"temp" in the Infobox for Rosenallis

What does "temp" mean in the infobox for Rosenallis? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 00:29, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

It means I don't know the Irish version of the name! Sarah777 (talk) 06:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

British Isles

Hello Sarah. Normally I have a sense of humour about such anon-editors as 86. But, his interesting suggestion at BI? was a bit overboard. GoodDay (talk) 21:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello there, never really involved myself in the debate over the British Isles, my opinion is the same as yours, but I don't think the ip's suggestion to GoodDay helps your side of the argument. --Jack forbes (talk) 22:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting it was helpful - the injunction was obviously in breach of WP:CIVIL - but the observation re British Nationalists (though I think it wasn't aimed at G'Day) struck me as being consistent with the facts. G'Day isn't a British Nationalist, I assume? (Mind you, I've never seen anyone admit to being a British nationalist on Wiki - but then that is hardly surprising, is it?). Sarah777 (talk) 06:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm a Canadian Nationalist. GoodDay (talk) 14:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Very good - Republican or Royalist? Sarah777 (talk) 20:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Republican; the people should have the choice as to who their Head of State will be. GoodDay (talk) 21:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

G'day - you seem to be a sturdy free-minded citizen rather than a subject. (But I've had great difficulty getting any references to subjects into the UK or "BI" articles. Oddly enough when you think about it. I'll be re-visiting that issue when I get the energy to muster a few references!)

Courage

Hello Sarah, I looked for the first time at the Great Britain and Ireland page and noted you saying that you doubt that Scotland would have the courage to break away from the UK. I think you are underestimating the Scottish people! Scots have, I assure you the courage to go it alone. There are plenty of people like myself who want independence, and in one of the latest opinion polls as many people wanted independence as those who did'nt. The longer the SNP are in power the more popular it becomes, so please don't assume the Scots don't have enough courage! --Jack forbes (talk) 00:03, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

That is news to brighten my day! I guess I've become frustrated at seeing the Scots dip their toes in the Waters of Freedom so many times down the years only to pull back from the edge every time! As we Irish have discovered - it is a whole lot better outside the cage....Sarah777 (talk) 09:05, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Zenit

Like I said there, Sarah, I sympathize with the fact you are frustrated with certain elements of wikipedia. I in the past have had similar frustrations. But English football's small problem with racism and the bigger Hiberno-Scottish problem with sectarianism have absolutely no bearing on Zenit, nor on the truth of claims in some of the media that Zenit have racist fans. If you wanna accuse any of the media of hypocrisy related to the state in which they work, that's an argument you should have with the individual journalists or else vent about it on a forum or among your friends. But it's not relevant to the content of this article, which is what its talk page is for. You'd also be better not appearing to seize every opportunity to bash the "British", as it is unlikely to make your editing experience more fulfilling nor to the point make anyone else's And just so I'm clear, this is not an admin warning or anything. Just counsel from a fellow editor! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

BTW, Dbachmann is an admin and actually one of the best. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that but I fear I disagree with almost everything you've said here.

• I don't regard British football racism as merely a "small problem" - it is a large problem.
• My comments have everything to do with the Zenit article; we must be consistent about what is put into such articles, whether Russian or British.
• I don't "seize every opportunity to bash the British" - but seek out and try to remove British or American POV that isn't consistent with WP:NPOV; which is what we should all do, surely? (And British pov is rather a greater problem on English Wiki than Russian pov, for example. For obvious reasons).
• If certain people conditioned by a lifetime of living the Anglo-American paradigm choose to interpret elimination of British pov as anti-Britishness rather than anti-pov and support for WP:NPOV then all I can do is try to educate them.
• "If you wanna accuse any of the media of hypocrisy related to the state in which they work, that's an argument you should have with the individual journalists". Hardly, when some folk are trying to use their propaganda to insert claims of racism selectively into only "foreign" clubs.

Again, thanks for your concern - but I'd ask you to try and look at this issue from a neutral pov. Your downplaying of British racism signals to me that you are not really able to adopt a neutral position in this case. Sarah777 (talk) 01:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, if D-man is one of the best it confirms my worst fears about the Admin class. Sarah777 (talk) 01:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't regard British football racism as merely a "small problem" - it is a large problem.

All racism I guess is a large problem, but most of the worst racism is gone from English football and England is not regarded as a problem country.

Reply - Clearly, as stated, that is not a view I'd share or which I believe is based on the facts.

My comments have everything to do with the Zenit article; we must be consistent about what is put into such articles, whether Russian or British.

Think you should read the journalism concerned. Zenit's alleged problem is of a different degree than anything any western European countries have had in my adult lifetime. Pointing out that English clubs have had or have some racism problems is irrelevant. All western European clubs with large fan-bases have racists. Making it "British" versus "Russian" misunderstands the context, ignoring the subtleties (this appears in the French and German media, as well as in Russia!) and ignoring the fact that UEFA actually commented on it. As far as I know, Swizerland is not in Britain and UEFA is not run by a bunch of English nationalists. You see, this is where such a conversation would lead, Russia good/bad, "Britain" good/bad. Not helpful.

Reply - Lots of things about Rangers supporters appeared in the media after they trashed Manchester and stabbed a Russian. I guess it suits your pov to downplay the British racist and hooligan problem.

I don't "seize every opportunity to bash the British" - but seek out and try to remove British or American POV that isn't consistent with WP:NPOV; which is what we should all do, surely? (And British pov is rather a greater problem on English Wiki than Russian pov, for example. For obvious reasons).

I don't think you can honestly deny that you appear to do this. There are better ways to balance different "national" perspectives, where you allege they exist, than by bashing everyone with a certain passport, which you appear [by implication] to do.

Reply - If there are "better ways" why is Wiki such a cesspit of British pov? That wasn't my doing. So I guess the "better ways" don't work.

If certain people conditioned by a lifetime of living the Anglo-American paradigm choose to interpret elimination of British pov as anti-Britishness rather than anti-pov and support for WP:NPOV then all I can do is try to educate them.

What you call the "Anglo-American paradigm" is the middle ground of "moderation" upon which the social order of English wikipedia is based. Calling it that may decrease your respect for it, but it is nevertheless essential. Thing is, if everyone believed they were the sole bearer of the truth and went around going against the discourse community, there'd be no way for this place to function. Wikipedia is not the place to challenge or change usage in the English language or move the middle ground of mainstream society. This is an encyclopedia. There are a number of things in this paradigm that are annoying, the British Isles maybe for you and many other Irish people, other things for me, but you need to reach a certain level of acceptance - or rather, tolerance - in order to function here as a good editor. This is a community of humans. You depart from the mainstream far enough and often enough, you'll get ostracized. This is natural. But don't glorify too much in this, happens to the nuts as well as the prophets. ;)

Reply - What I call the "Anglo-American paradigm" is anything but a "moderation"!!!. It is a middle ground amongst the 4% of global population that make up the UK and America. Classic example of parochialism and conditioning! And Wiki isn't a "community"; it is many communities at best. "You depart from the mainstream far enough and often enough, you'll get ostracized." As I said, I am the mainstream.

If certain people conditioned by a lifetime of living the Anglo-American paradigm choose to interpret elimination of British pov as anti-Britishness rather than anti-pov and support for WP:NPOV then all I can do is try to educate them.

I don't know if people call that anti-Britishness, so can't comment.

Reply - You called it anti-Britishness! (Amlong with lots of Anglophiles).

Hardly, when some folk are trying to use their propaganda to insert claims of racism selectively into only "foreign" clubs.

People are people. We can suspect those motivations, but in this case they have an excuse. The job of good editors is to decide in that context if the material is reliable and if so if it puts undue weight on certain negative elements. But you got the wrong end of the stick here. If all those stories were true (I suspect here they are based on truth but exaggerated), it would actually be notable, as no other European club has been noted as having such a serious problem ... hence why the Zenit fan there is annoyed by it. Think of it this way, there are probably Basque speakers in every EU country, but in Spain and France, there are a higher proportion of them so that it is sufficiently notable to be mentioned in the Spain article. Not in the Ireland or Scotland article though.

Reply - Refer to the cover of Ranger's British fans in the global media as I have mentioned. I recall the San Francisco Chronicle (fairly typical) said lots about British football thugs and zilch about racist Russian ones. To give but one example.

Well, if D-man is one of the best it confirms my worst fears about the Admin class

I doubt this approach is ever gonna yield results for you. Seriously! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 01:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

That rather depends on what results I am striving to achieve, dunnit? But of course as improving the project is my only goal I would calculate some minor achievements already. Sarah777 (talk) 02:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

. I guess it suits your pov to downplay the British racist and hooligan problem.

Lol. You really don't know me.

It is a middle ground amongst the 4% of global population that make up the UK and America. Classic example of parochialism and conditioning!

You've chosen to lump two states together (I assume you're not putting other English-speaking countries like Australia, Ireland, etc in this) and call anything you don't like "Anglo-American paradigm". I have not done this, so dunno why you'd continue to forward an argument to be based on it. I think the absurdity of this construct would come across more if you ever tried to illustrate it with a concrete example.

Lots of things about Rangers supporters appeared in the media after they trashed Manchester and stabbed a Russian.

Yes, Sarah, once again, your point? It has an article, 2008_UEFA_Cup_Final_riots.

You called it anti-Britishness!

Not in this universe I haven't.

As I said, I am the mainstream.

Well, you'll discover yourself the truth of that eventually.

Refer to the cover of Ranger's British fans in the global media as I have mentioned. I recall the San Francisco Chronicle (fairly typical) said lots about British football thugs and zilch about racist Russian ones. To give but one example

You've missed the point entirely! I think you probably have to read my comments more carefully. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, I completely agree with you that the allegations of racism against Zenit do not appear to be well founded and should not be inserted in the article. On the other hand a long discussion about treatment of the religious minorities in the Great Britain is not needed on the talk page of a Russian football club. It does not help much and easily deteriorate into personal attacks and incivility. I have archived the discussion please do not continue it there. Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool Alex - just watch them though. Now Deacon, (see Alex agrees with me and he's an Admin) I think YOU have missed the point entirely. It is that to the world outside, British football is far more identified with hooliganism and racism than Russian football is. The irony of this appears to have escaped both yourself and the British meeja hacks. As for "you'll discover yourself the truth of that eventually" - I've got news for you - I already have. And I'd include most Australians, Canadians and NZ folk - but not most in Ireland. We are the only country where the natives regained control - hence our better perspective. Sarah777 (talk) 02:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Zenit 2

Alex did well to archive it. Anyways, I don't know what you think I'm arguing, Sarah. You are not correctly identifying where I am coming from. I don't care about "British hooliganism" nor do I have any real opinion on the prevalence of racism at Zenit, just interested that the article holds to WP:UNDUE and verifiability, and (here in practice) trying to get you to stop introducing disruptive irrelevancies onto talk pages. BTW, I have not found Irish people to have any perspective on the world greatly divergent from the rest of the English-speaking world, except on the issue of naming the British Isles of course (and I am far from convinced this is mainstream even in Ireland). The factory workers of China, the Yanomamo horticulturalists and pygmies of the Congo forests probably don't have anything to say on it at all. And btw, Scotland is not identified with hooliganism (consistently awarded by UEFA and FIFA for its good behaviour), England might be (as is Holland and Germany to lesser extents), a point very well known to people who actually follow football and a point you seem to have missed in desire to go at this in this way. And as I said to the user who brought it up, Scottish journalists weren't reporting this. For your information, for all your love of making things "British", the amount of overlap in football journalism between Scotland and England is virtually non-existent (because of separate newspapers and separate leagues and national teams), except the websites of certain UK wide media organizations (who normally cover separately in paper and tv but not online) ... which is another reason the conspiracy and media stuff is just absurd. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Why do you keep referring to a "conspiracy" when I have never claimed there is any such thing? Monkeys don't need to conspire to swing from the trees - they just do 'cos they are monkeys! That's how these things work. You seem to be questioning the existence of a nation called Britain - or a thing called Britishness - which I find interesting. (I guess would too if I had to live in the place!) So I don't "know where you are coming from"? - it doesn't really matter - I deal with arguments not motives; though I may of course note motivation. I'd also have to quibble with your characterisation of Irish pov; everyone has different views on everything but opinion polls clearly show huge differences between Ireland and the Anglo-world re for example, the invasion of Iraq where we were at the far "anti" end of thew Western spectrum and the Australians, Americans and British were part of the invader-force. Despite all the marches etc when the war started a very large majority of British people supported the murderous aggression; it was opposed by 85% of the Irish. A difference of perspective borne of the experience of the transcendental evil of British Imperialism. And, of course, in that we were at one with the mainstream, moderate international opinion. (Though I know Anglo-hacks often define the "International Community" to mean the Anglosphere plus a few hangers-on - but in the real world it isn't - its the mainstream of the other 6 billion). Sarah777 (talk) 13:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, I think the reason there is such a divergence Between Irish and "British" opinion on the Iraqi invasion is the pravda like reporting in the media, and that includes the Scottish media. You have heard the saying "don't believe everything you read in the press"? Well, I'm afraid there are a sizeable amount of people that do. The Pravda like reporting in the Scottish press is so bad you would have to see it to believe it. Just one small example, before the elections, Alex Salmond and the Scottish Labour leader Jack McConnell had a debate on tv in which Salmond won every argument and had McConnell tied up in knots. What happens? Next day the press report that Jack won hands down! A blatant lie that would have made the Pravda editors proud. They would'nt know the truth if it fell on them, or rather they do but it does not jibe with their own politics. What actually astonishes me is that the SNP got into power withought a single newspaper backing them, which restores a little faith in me for the Scottish people. Can you imagine what would happen if they had a couple of newspapers backing them? You may be reading this thinking, my god, he's rambling on about Scotland again! Sorry, can't help it! :> Jack forbes (talk) 14:28, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Jack, I have the utmost respect for Scots who distance themselves and want no part of the British State. But as in NI - you are either Irish or British; I guess in Scotland there is a similar choice - Scottish/British - you can't really be both. To my mind if you don't support an Ireland independent of the British Crown you are not Irish. You are culturally British, even if you happen to live on this island. At least our Northern Unionists have the honesty to be clear about that. I sympathize with your difficulty with the British press; but it merely reflects where power and majority opinion lies in the British state and until Scotland leaves that state you'll be stuck with its establishment. Of course Deek here thinks the Scottish Press is totally different to the English but then I guess he only reads the sports pages! Sarah777 (talk) 19:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, you are seriously misguided if you think all "British" people supported the Iraqi invasion. Generalizing based on "nation" (or states in this case) is just intellectually flawed, especially drawing distinctions between 4 countries, England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland, that are pretty much identical in culture as far as any outsider is concerned. You heard plenty of people there giving self-righteous rants similar to yours, though not being Irish they attributed their presumed moral superiority to things other than Irishness or "not being an Anglo". As for Britain being a "nation", well, that's up to the individuals as such. Plenty of "sources" claim "Britain" is not a nation, so it's a POV thing. But some people, like yourself, think it is a nation. For my own POV, nations are just made up ways of classifying human beings and pretty daft ones at that, though that doesn't stop me, irrational as I am, being proud of being Scottish and Irish. Nonetheless, nations are one of the banes of every good historian's existence, and nationalists with no respect for wikipedia's neutrality standards are the banes of the good editor here. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear - I never said "all British people supported the Iraqi invasion". In fact I went to some length to explain exactly what I mean. The people in the UK were in favour of butchery in Iraq by a substantial majority - as was their Parliament; the people of Ireland were massively opposed. Fact. Live with it. Reality bites.

"pretty much identical in culture as far as any outsider is concerned." So what? I'm pointing out that contrary to the pov of British and other "outsiders" it isn't, in fact, the same - there are significant political differences based on historical experience. That's why 70% Brits supported (initially) the murder in Iraq and 85% of Irish opposed it.

And don't be so presumptive of the ignorance of these "outsiders" - see the vast number of countries where folks attitude changes when you explain that you are Irish, 'not British - it ain't just the Irish detest British Imperialism.

I take it from your piffle about "plenty of people there giving self-righteous rants similar to yours" that you are one of the large majority of British folk who supported the invasion; just as I was one of the overwhelming number of Irish people opposed. It's the "British" thing that puts warmongers in a large majority in the UK and in a tiny minority in Ireland. Cultural difference you see. In fact it is a cultural chasm, as the disputes here over attempts by good editors to remove the pov of British and American Nationalist editors, with no respect for wikipedia's neutrality standards, clearly demonstrates. Sarah777 (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Listen, Sarah, if you wanna preach divisive inflammatory rhetoric, doing it to me is a complete waste of your energy. In the 21st century among an educated audience, it is probably a complete waste of your energy more generally. Basically, because I object to and am trying to improve your reasoning and your methods, you've been consistently labeling me everything at the opposite end of the political spectrum from yourself (Deacon must believe in black if he denies white [or even if he doesn't embrace white with an immediate flourish of emotive verbiage]), and profiling yourself as a tendentious editor on some kind of crusade. You need to be more sophisticated than that, and recognize what wikipedia is about. You've guessed my background and opinion correctly on no occasion. If you wanna see the whole world divided neatly into the imperialists and the oppressed, perpetrators and victims, Irish and Anglo-blah-blah, there's little I can do about it other than try to guide you away, but you're gonna have to take this on board for yourself through your own intellectual growth. And btw, if there is anything like a trend, and there are a bulk of exceptions, it's that people tend more often than not to follow the leadership of their governments, and that the UK has to manage its diplomatic interests more pro-actively, esp. with regard to its status and its relationship with the USA. I would regard the idea that Tony Blair and such conducted that war for the sake of imperialism as slightly childish, though I admit I'm not psychic. The idea you have, that there is some special difference because the Irish people have a more developed glorification of historical victimhood may or may not be correct, but that's too dodgy an assertion to be made without being fully fleshed out in a paper or a book. Off the top of my head, it certainly doesn't make sense of the regional statistics within the UK, nor why Poland (actual historical victim country of imperialism), but say not France (historical perpetrator of imperialism) supported the war. However if "evil British" and "saintly Irish" is as prominent as a duality in your own thought process as it is in your public assertions, it doesn't surprise me that you would think like that. Sorry, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Fond of straw men, aren't you. I never said the Irish were "saintly". I said they had a different perspective based on history - not a very radical notion; more stating the bleedin' obvious. You obviously like to pretend that facts which don't fit your confusion must be denied! Despite your denials I reckon I got you sussed - y'know - if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck etc. Regardless, your statements are soaked in Anglo-conditioning. And don't flatter yourself - my interest in converting or convincing you is less than zero. I am merely trying to get you to stop inserting British Nationalist POV into Wiki articles about Ireland.

Another straw man: "The idea you have, that there is some special difference because the Irish people have a more developed glorification of historical victimhood" This puerile psychobabble inclines me to think you are somewhat out of your depth here. So, for the last time (to you) I will repeat:

I said the Irish had a different perspective based on history. If you are unable to read simple English I see little point in continuing this. Sarah777 (talk) 21:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Please re-read what I've said; it doesn't sound like you've read anything from my text but your own prejudices. I am interested in trying to help you become a good user, though maybe I need to learn how to do it better or when not to attempt the impossible. But thanks, I'll add "British nationalist" to "Scottish nationalist", "Irish nationalist", "Russian nationalist", "Lithuanian nationalist", "Greek nationalist" and all the other such things "patriotic" editors of various national allegiances have called me over my time here. 'Tis an honour! Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 21:55, 18 May 2008

(UTC)

Add whatever you like to whatever you like Deek. You're inability to address the points I make and your focus on straw men you invent means you are getting rather boring. Zzzzzz....... Sarah777 (talk) 21:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thought this was over! Are you adding this to convince me, or yourself? If you wanna convince me you need to do more than just make assertions! Your standard of argument here is below what I'd normally respond to, only interest is trying to help you become a good user. Appears success is a long way off! :D Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 22:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.............Sarah777 (talk) 22:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

All we are saying, is give peace a chance; a song by John Lennon, who was a UKer with Irish roots (I think). GoodDay (talk) 22:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. But as in life we need the criminal to repent, the abuser to confess before there is closure. Instead they are still at the denial stage. Sarah777 (talk) 22:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps; but it's also important, to put behind the scars of yesteryear. Cheers. GoodDay (talk) 22:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

And we can all walk off into the sunset together! :) If only it were that simple. Jack forbes (talk) 22:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Imagine, all the people..., someday Jack, someday. GoodDay (talk) 23:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)