Hope you are well. I see you have been busy saving that medieval Scotland article from the chop. I have to thank you for that, a burden I left behind to the community ... though even if I'd been wikipresent I'd just have let it go. Doing that article back in the day was me as an undergrad getting to grips with the subject for the first time, but it badly needed rewritten if for no other reason several big books came out in the intervening period. How is everything else? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 16:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well what a very pleasant surprise! I thought you might have permanently vanished. Re medieval Scotland, it was bit worrisome that having read J.D. Mackie at some point in the last century and a few Donnchadh Ó Corráin articles in the present one that I am now what passes for an expert in these parts. No serious harm done I hope. As for everything else - well this little blank was good news although I see an old chum is in the news this week. Mais oui! has been spreading fear and alarm at WP Scotland, although I am sure he too will be bouyed up by your return. I have been listening to local lass Emeli Sandé, visiting the west coast and wondering if I will get around to another GA this summer. Still looking for Duanaire na Sracaire incidentally. Hope you are well. BenMacDui 19:20, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed yes. At Domhnall mac Raghnaill we read of a praise poem reviewed by McLeod & Bateman pp. 502-3. Apparently Old MacDonald is a "Descendant of Gofraidh, descendant of Amhlaibh Fionn" and there is some speculation therein as to who these ancestors may be. This strikes me as potentially interesting but I lack a copy and don't much feel like buying one for what may be two lines of interesting text. BenMacDui 18:49, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We read that:
A recently rediscovered poem — though from a 17th century manuscript written by Niall MacMhuirich — was addressed to one Domhnall mac Raghnaill, Rosg Mall ("Domhnall mac Raghnaill, of the Stately Gaze"). It is possible that this may refer to the Domhnall mac Raghnaill a claim made by its recent editor.{McLeod & Bateman, Duanaire na Sracaire, p. 75.} The poem includes these lines.
Ó Ghothfruigh ó hÁmhlaibh Fhinn,
Descendant of Gofraidh, descendant of Amhlaibh Fionn;,
The article goes on to say that "is not clear who Gofraidh or Amhlaibh Fionn are, but they may refer to some of the Norse-Gaelic rulers of Mann and Dublin, possibly Amhlaibh Conung and Gofraidh Crobhán." {McLeod & Bateman, Duanaire na Sracaire, pp. 502-3.}
This last ref notes Prof. Woolf's 2005 observation that the origin of "Clan Gothefray" I.e. Clan Donald may be a reference to Crovan. Fair enough, but..... If we take as read that Amhlaibh Fionn is "Amlaib Conung" then:
this is an interesting piece of evidence in the good old Amhlaibh/Olafr inn hvitti debate and
one read's that the order of appearance in texts is indicative of relative seniority and it isn't immediately obvious why Godred Crovan and Amhlaibh would appear either in this order or indeed together. Without a wise authority getting there first it is surely OR to suggest that Gofraid of Lochlainn, to my mind the obvious contender, is who the poem refers to. I therefore wonder if you, or anyone watching this space has any further insight. BenMacDui 10:07, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Somerled's actual genealogy doesn't look reliable beyond the Suibne character.p.3 By Donald's time, they probably hadn't a clue who their ancestor was, but it was beneficial to claim descent from those Ui Imair guys in order to boost their claim to rule the isles. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:30, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can't disagree - but whilst it is possible that they didn't have any real idea of who Gofraid or Amlaibh were as historical figures, they must surely have had some idea of their significance as part of their mythology. I think what I am asking is - given that McLeod & Bateman seem disinclined to speculate, has anyone else? It seems to me only a matter of time before something appears in print. I note that Clan Donald is silent on the whole Clan Gothofred business. BenMacDui 12:24, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Those guys here would then be ancestors of the Manx family, "old money" when the MacSorleys were establishing themselves. But to my knowledge there has been little recent speculation. If there's nothing in McDonald, try Skene (whose works are online).
Further to your request in April that I take contact with you via email, I have decided to accept your suggestion now. You have mail. --Mais oui! (talk) 13:01, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I saw a charming documentary on life in medieval Scotland today. Many beautiful scenes of the Highlands too. Hope all is well with you, Ruhrfisch><>°° 21:49, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
They are indeed gorgeous and I believe the west coast (pictured) was the prototype for Slartibartfast's award-winning design of Norway. I also hear that the film has had good reviews and that although it is not on release here until August, VisitScotland are getting exited. Incidentally, if the rain here keeps up I shall find myself at a loose end this summer and may finally get round to offering another island at FAC. Am I right in thinking that the galleries created by this well-meaning edit won't pass muster? BenMacDui 08:37, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS When you say "life in medieval Scotland today" - you do know we have stuff like electricity now?
I guess "prototype" means something like "draft", but even if I'm living in the part of the world for which Slartibartfast won his award I'll admit the draft is a pretty good one ;) Some day I hope to get to see that charming documentary on life in medieval Scotland too, but not today :P Finn Rindahl (talk) 16:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to be unclear - I meant I had seen the film "today" (Saturday, though it opened in the US on Friday). I was pretty sure from another documentary that modern Scotland had electricity and other modern conveniences. There was a very cool circle of Standing Stones in the first film - if it is not based on something real, perhaps Visit Scotland can build one like it for the tourists, ;-=) Ruhrfisch><>°° 20:29, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS I looked at the older and newer versions of the article. FAC usually does not like galleries, although per Wikipedia:Galleries there are a few cases where they are OK - I do not think the current galleries really meet these criteria, though. I also think the older version (no galleries) had some issues with image sandwiching text, which is also to be avoided per the MOS. However, usually when an article is expanded for FAC, it gets more text and has more room for better spacing of the existing images. Ruhrfisch><>°° 01:45, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look at this disgraceful tactic: leaving a foul personal attack and then covering the tracks so that you have to delve in the history to uncover it. It is perfectly clear who the stalker is here and who is being stalked, and I can prove it with literally hundreds of examples of User:Tim! following around after me removing country cats from categories I have created in my WikiProject Scotland work. I have exhibited tolerance and restraint I barely knew I possessed, but I draw the line at another User using blatant double standards, and then defending themselves by accusing me of something that they themselves are guilty of.--Mais oui! (talk) 10:19, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is highly unfortunate, but I am flying off on holiday now, and I have promised my wife to leave Wikipedia alone until we get back. We are namely visiting my elderly parents (who live in another country, and I therefore see very rarely) and all things computer related drives mum nuts. I fully intend to have fun and recharge my batteries. Many thanks for your sane intervention. A dose of cool, rational, detatched, intelligent thinking is precisely what this fruitless nonsense requires. --Mais oui! (talk) 07:31, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
HINBA : Got your message this morning. Not sure if I am responding in the right place. Can easily see potential COI which is why I kept the edit to the bare minimum. It just occurred to me that on an internet website I had completely overlooked pointing out that the book is available on the internet.
Incidentally, you may be interested to know that Hinba is not in a wild and lonely place, it is Fort Augustus, the old Gaelic name for which is AcHINBAdy. Macglasrich
You were nearly in the right place. User pages are usually used for editors to keep information and User talk pages, (like this one) are where discussions are held. Yes, I can see you have been attempting to avoid influencing the articles, although it is usually best to avoid issues completely where a conflict may occur. However, if you feel the need to add the book in question please do so under a "Further reading" heading if it is not being used as a specific reference in the article. Good luck with your research. BenMacDui 17:50, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delighted to see you again! Thanks for joining in. This FAC talk page has some atrocious bulleting and indenting etc, and as a result I think you thought the opening remarks were from Jim of Bleak, but they were in fact mine (as are most of the initial comments - Jim just chimed in on the referencing question). Cheers! :-) hamiltonstone (talk) 01:34, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank-you and fixed. BenMacDui 09:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You do realise of course you protected the wrong version?
The ad hominem attacks are distinctly one sided, I haven't bitten and responded. Its WP:TE repeating the same points over and over, ignoring the discussion but accusing others of not responding, falsifying what the sources say, indulging in WP:OR and WP:SYN, whilst accusing others of the same and huge reams of argumentative text, making it difficult for an outsider to identify who the problem is.
I was on the point of taking this to WP:ANI but my experience there with disruptive editors like this isn't encouraging. Wee Curry Monstertalk 15:27, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I go out of my way to choose the wrong version. Whether or not you are justifiably aggrieved, nothing is likely to be gained by an intervention that commences by taking sides. Our dispute resolution procedures may be cumbersome and flawed although I think they get there more often than not. I don't know if this short breathing space will accomplish much, but it seemed worth a try. BenMacDui 15:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your intervention was appreciated nontheless. I'd appreciate someone keeping an eye (or a lid) on the problem. Regards. Wee Curry Monstertalk 16:56, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ben, if you could please explain to me how can an editor involved in a dispute decide that his is the right version? If you ask me, the wrong version is now protected. Wee asking to an editor to protect his version is not uncommon, as he routinely behaves as if articles were his property. Even more, he has just as much consent from other editors as I have to add his edit, why is his regarded as the correct one? Cheers. Gaba p (talk) 17:07, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you follow the link above to "wrong version" you will see this is an ironic expression. Wee Curry Monster is not deciding anything and (at this point at least) I am not expressing any opinion about which disputed version is right, wrong or indifferent. I am simply creating a short break from an incipient edit war in the hope that a more dispassionate analysis of the facts will allow consensus to emerge. Furthermore, Wee Curry Monster did not ask me to do anything. The unfortunate remarks on various talk pages concerning the article were an obvious sign that communications had broken down. BenMacDui 18:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have never known the right version be protected... Mr MacDui see [2] it seems someone is determined to edit war their personal opinion into the article. Wee Curry Monstertalk 18:10, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am watching the page. If need be I will comment there. BenMacDui 18:39, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having a hard time figuring out the citations. I've commented at Talk:Islay/GA1
Replied
By the way, the summer monthly highs on Isley are about the same as my winter highs! MathewTownsend (talk) 22:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Now you know why we Scots are so grumpy! BenMacDui 09:22, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again!
Sorry to take so long, but I'm just now getting the picture. I've left a few more comments. Now that I understand more, I think it's a wonderful article. MathewTownsend (talk) 14:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Been offline for a couple of days and will get to this asap. BenMacDui 15:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi MacDui. This could be of use. I just signed-up myself.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 06:01, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks - I will check it out asap. BenMacDui 09:28, 19 September 2012 (UTC) PS Have been slowly going thru' Smyth (84). With any luck "Origins" will hit mainspace on day...[reply]
I opened a case at WP:DRN, which yesterday concluded with a statement by a mediator I was taking the correct approach. I have posted at WP:RSN see WP:RSN#Verification source citations is this WP:OR and WP:SYN, which concluded the source Gaba p was using was not reliable. Today he went straight back to the article, re-introduced the same edit and attributed to the same unreliable source. I'm getting further dismayed by the constant and unremitting personal attacks as it seems a tactic to deter anyone from disagreeing with him and correcting his agenda based editing. If you look at the WP:DRN#Self-determination it was constant. Help would be appreciated thanks. Wee Curry Monstertalk 11:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I will look into this of course - and you must bear in mind that my role is to help the appropriate development of the encyclopedia rather than to take sides. BenMacDui 07:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The only "side" I would expect any admin to take is to ensure the development of an encyclopedia in accordance with the 5 pillars and if they felt that I was violating them I'd be happy to take redirection. I just find it a little disconcerting that when faced with a disruptive, rude, tendentious editor, admins are hesitant to take action. Whilst I appreciate the warning, if you check the history of his talk page he has been warned repeatedly for the same thing by various admins. As no action has ever been taken he has simply been getting bolder. Wee Curry Monstertalk 10:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is unbelievable. Ok let's go by parts.
Ben I see you deleted my response to Muginsx but not his blatant attacks and lies aimed at me. Do you honestly think this is wise? That editor had already stopped by my talk page to accuse/threaten me a couple of weeks ago so I thought I would take it with a little humor. I really don't see what you can take as offensive about my reply, I would actually think that his attacks (and lies) aimed at me would represent a far bigger offense. You also stopped by my talk page to reprehend me but did no such thing with Muginsx who started it. I'd ask you to reconsider this.
Now to the points Wee is trying to make:
"I opened a case at WP:DRN, which yesterday concluded with a statement by a mediator I was taking the correct approach". Please go see the disussion for yourself, at least the final conclusion. The only editor involved came with a conclusion not even Wee agreed with but is nonetheless using to back his near-vandalism edits. Said editor never bothered to answer neither his nor mine concerns about his ruling by the way.
"I have posted at WP:RSN see WP:RSN#Verification source citations is this WP:OR and WP:SYN, which concluded the source Gaba p was using was not reliable. Today he went straight back to the article, re-introduced the same edit and attributed to the same unreliable source.". Now there's no other way to put it: Wee is lying. Let me say that again: he is deliberately lying attempting to gain the favor of an admin. If you go to the article's history you can see for yourself that it was I who twice had to remove the source we were told not to use because Wee kept adding it back! I know it's confusing, let me try to make it as simple as possible: the source that started this whole thing (the Lopez book), the one that Wee at first attempted to remove and then just moved to a different (not-related) part of the article, we were told at the RS/N not to use that source (and a better one was suggested) My edit was to remove that source from the article as advised and Wee twice brought it back in by blindly reverting my changes. And he is now accusing me of introducing the source when I had to take it out twice because he kept putting it back in?? This is not counting Langus edit who also reverted (a third time) Wee's introduction of said source. I just can't believe he would lie so openly about something that can be so easily checked.
The source I am adding to the article is the one we were advised to use at the RS/N. Please (please!) go see the discussion at the RS/N. There two different editors tell Wee he is in fact engaging in WP:OR and WP:SYN and that, properly sourced, the statement (he is fighting to remove) should be present in WP. Two of the three sources now used in the article (Risman + Escudé) to back the sentence Wee is fighting so hard to remove, were suggested by editors at that page.
Two editors reverting the same constant rv's by Wee doesn't mean they are a WP:TAG team, rather than he is behaving like a vandal. He breached the WP:3RR (one more time) and I truly believe me telling him that he had is the only reason he stopped and came here.
Please do stop by my talk page to check for yourself Wee's claim that "he has been warned repeatedly for the same thing by various admins". You will see that the only warnings I have are: Wee's own, one by editor Kahastok relating another scuffle with Wee in another article (very similar to this one) and the last comment by Muginsx which was more like a threat because it came out of nowhere.
Earlier this year Wee had me blocked accused of being a sock puppet of another editor basing on how I wrote. After several weeks of trying to explain I was not that person, the only way I could lift the block imposed to me was to give away my right to anonymity so that another admin could check that I was in fact a different person than the one they were accusing me of being (again: based solely on my writing) To this day Wee keeps using my erroneous blocking to try to smear me, which I believe he is attempting to do right now.
Oh and one last thing: I am getting bolder??. You reverted 3 times and edit agreed upon by 3 editors and I'm the one getting bolder???
Ben, I don't expect you to take sides but don't be fooled by Wee presenting himself as the victim here. He constantly behaves as if he WP:OWNED several articles unilaterally deciding which information goes in and which is taken out in complete disregard of the consensus of other editors. This particular edit, the one he has the biggest problem with, was agreed upon by 3 different editors (Lanhus, Churn and Change and myself) He know this but he just keeps trying to impose his decision as the last word. This is not acceptable and not the way to collaborate. Cheers. Gaba p (talk) 12:13, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank-you for your reply. I confess I don't follow all of it e.g. the para beginning "Oh and one last thing...". I see that you feel aggrieved, I also see that you seem to have been erroneously blocked early in your time here, and that may give you cause for suspicion and resentment. However, from my perspective the problem is not so much to do with the presenting issues (I know little about the Falklands conflict or its sources) but with the attitudes that are being brought to the discussions. I see above that you are accusing other editors of misbehaviour. It may well be that few involved in these dialogues are guiltless, but the one glaring absence from your reply is any kind of apology or hint that you have understanding of WP:CIVIL, which (do I really need to remind you?) is one of the 5 Pillars. Unless and until you take this on board I fear that you will simply wallow deeper into a mire in which blocks or bans may be the most likely outcome. My posting at ANI is aimed at ensuring others with greater experience of these kinds of conflicts become involved. I urge you to heed their advice. BenMacDui 12:52, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ben. I don't really accuse many editors of misbehavior, just Wee and as of two weeks ago Muginsx who came out of nowhere to attack me; I seriously have no idea who he is and where he came from. I understand your issue about my uncivil answer to Muginsx. It attempted to be a humorous reply to an out-of-nowhere attack to me but I can see that, at least from your perspective, I failed at it being just humorous. I'll keep this advise at hand next time I make any attempt at a comic relief. Cheers.
PD: The Oh and one last thing.. part was aimed at Wee accusing me of getting bolder when it was in fact he who breached the 3RR reverting an edit agreed upon by 3 editors. Gaba p (talk) 13:12, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PD2: I don't know if this only happens to me or what, but this is how I see your talk page. That banner floating at the end hides most of any comment made last in your talk page. Just a heads up. Cheers. Gaba p (talk) 13:16, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know - I don't see this myself so it's probably a browser issue. If any other watchers are suffering from the same problem pls let me know. BenMacDui 10:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Ben MacDui. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi Ben,
since you were the admin who took one of my previous comments directed at Muggins as uncivil, I thought I'd ask you. Could you please tell me if my english has gotten so bad that this comment could be seriously taken as containing a sexual innuendo?:
"Friendly word of advice Muggins: I understand you can be very fond of Wee but I would restrain my desire of helping him a little bit. You are starting to be disruptive and distracting in this arbitration process and even more, I truly believe that if you continue down this path you'll just end up hurting his case even more. Cheers. "
I just can't believe Muggins would make such serious accusations when I went out of my way attempting to be as polite as possible (specially considering his constant attacks and threats of blocking directed at me) Am I inadvertently making some sort of "sexual remark"??
I would have bet anything that my comment was as civil and polite as can be, but his ferocious lashing against me has me doubting now.
I truly am baffled by this editor who is coming at me with such anger when we have, as far as I can remember, never crossed paths before.
Thank you. Gaba p (talk) 22:46, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One of the problems you are suffering from is that you tend to communicate in a way that might be similar to the way you would do in an informal setting with your peer group. You probably intend to be friendly and jocular, and poke fun at a few of your chums. Unfortunately the written word does not tend to convey that sort of thing well, as I know to my cost. To someone of different age, gender or cultural background it may appear unfunny, offensive, even threatening. As to this specific remark, I don't think it is very clever, but no I don't experience it as especially offensive or sexist. However, that was clearly not Mugginsx's experience. By implication, Mugginsx is female. Go back and re-read the edit that I cautioned you for earlier and ask yourself what you would think if your daughter/sister/mother was in a public place and a strange man came up to her and said that sort of thing. I infer that Mugginsx has decided that you are a boor and one that has failed to aplogise for their earlier lack of grace. In this context (which I admit involves some guess work on my part) it may be easier to understand this editor's reaction. BenMacDui 10:17, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your input. Muggins attacks are crossing the line at this point and the fact that he misinterprets my comments does not give him the right to produce such vicious attacks. Cheers. Gaba p (talk) 14:32, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
From back in July, re this edit, note that "just deserts" is not a typo. "Just Desserts" is a common pun on it, but the phrase itself is from the "other" meaning of desert, something deserved. Cheers! -- JHunterJ (talk) 02:45, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know. BenMacDui 10:00, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know. BenMacDui 10:00, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for September 26[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Easdale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Press and Journal (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) 11:02, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have once more made a good faith proposal to end the seemingly never-ending dispute at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents Self-determination. I have made some extensive research which I have detailed in my latest request to close and I respectfully ask that you consider it. I have been here some years now and never been blocked and after reading ALL of the material, I am convinced there is no other alternative than the one I proposed in view of the negative past histories between parties, especially Gaba p, and more than enough prior attempts have met with Wikipedia:IDONTLIKEYOU. I respectfully request that you consider the proposal I have laid out there. Thank you. Mugginsx (talk) 07:42, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
I must have missed it but Gaba p and Langus-TxT have been referring to my real life identity at WP:ANI. Can this be removed from the page history please. Its also rather curious how Gaba is aware of it, given his claim to have only interacted me since I changed my online identity as a result of off-wiki issues. Wee Curry Monstertalk 15:48, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have not undertaken a Wikipedia:Revision deletion before and as the instructions require very close attention and I am short of time right now I have requested someone familiar with this to act. You may also wish to read WP:Oversight. This process may take longer, hence my request above. You would need to contact Wikipedia:Requests for oversight. BenMacDui 17:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Re your Revdel request, please see here. BenMacDui 10:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wee, your previous nick is right there in the Brickbats thing you post every time[3] and have showed me as a badge of honor I don't know how many times already. It doesn't take a private investigator to see you changed your nick name not long ago. It looks like you have no desire of dropping the sock puppet accusations any time soon though.
If you have privacy concerns because this your real name, then I have no problems with it being removed from the board and the history (even though it is completely accessible in WP, even in your own talk page as I just showed) I urge Ben nonetheless to take a look a your almost immediate block in the spanish WP for breaking the 3RR in a Falklands-related article before removing it. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 17:21, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mr MacDui, thank you, may I politely request you acquaint the above gentleman with the policy on WP:OUT. Wee Curry Monstertalk 20:52, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done - under CSD G7. BenMacDui 08:05, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ben may I politely request you ask the above gentleman to please indicate me what does the guideline he pointed at is supposed to mean? Oh this is silly, Wee the silence treatment seems rather childish to me so I'll address you directly: I have no idea what you mean by WP:OUT (There are other places for potentially useful or valuable content which is not appropriate for Wikipedia.??). If you would like to explain, please do so. If not, do not. In any case, have a nice day. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 22:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think WCM means WP:OUTING, which I urge you to read very carefully indeed. BenMacDui 08:05, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, done. I just note that I simply posted a link to Wee's account which is publicly available in the spanish WP, in no way did I intent to harass him (specially since I have no way of knowing that that is his real name) His account in the spanish WP is still active and hasn't been deleted or closed due to a name change, as far as I can see. In any case thank you, now I understand what he meant. I wasn't familiar with that guideline and I will keep it present. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 11:19, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PD: I just realized that in that banner that hides the bottom of your talk page (in my case at least) and I'm always avoiding when I stop by here, you mention how you prefer to be called MacDui. I've been calling you Ben this whole time without realizing that, please take no offense of it. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 13:13, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No offence taken at all. Many of us have some cause or other to regret our choice of username and in my case this minor confusion is one such. BenMacDui 10:49, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All involved in this thread please note my post at WP:ANI earlier this morning. BenMacDui 10:49, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After all, it's not like you have much on your plate... --Mais oui! (talk) 07:56, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Flattery is always welcome, but, my fondness for Amhuinnsuidhe Castle aside, what makes you think I take an interest in the affairs of the gentry, whatever their provenance? I see Dr B seems to have taken a dislike to the whole concept. BenMacDui 11:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
I couldn't give a toss about the "affairs of the gentry", but the country's architectural heritage is an important topic. Also, estate houses and their associated activities are often a key part of the stories of local areas. --Mais oui! (talk) 14:20, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello MacDui. I want to confirm you that I will be following the recommendations you gave us in the Self-determination case.
It took me by surprise your interpretation of my comment that "my opinions tend to agree with those of other Argentine editors", but I can understand your suspicion. I have been thinking about it and I believe it boils down to two factors: cultural affinity and the atmosphere that exists/existed in the Falklands-related articles.
Anyway, the main reason why I'm here is because I've been reading about mentoring, but I'm not quite sure of how it works. I believe that the reasons for I would want mentorship are not the same ones for which you're suggesting it to me. We would be talking about involuntary mentorship here, right?
Thanks for your effort and time. --Langus (t) 02:30, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for getting back to me. It has been said that nationality disputes are the single most controversial issue that affects Wikipedia and I have little evidence to contradict this. I am no stranger to the problem - the way things are seen is, for example, often different if you are looking at things from a British rather than a Scottish "point of view" - never mind Argentine vs. British in this context. They key is to attempt to think what something might look like not from the point of view of the protagonists but as a genuinely neutral third party. Accepting that you are by no means a new user, I was thinking more of Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area. BenMacDui 09:49, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello MacDui, I just thought I'd let you know that WCM is editing Falklands related articles again, after merely two weeks of "retiring" with the classy "fuck wikipedia, I'm out of here".
I'm not familiar with the ANI process and implications since that was my first time there, but I was under the impression that an admin ruling was mandatory, not optional.
In any case, as you stated I will not be editing any article related to said topic until February at least (which covers the 4 month topic-ban period) but I would like to note that if a given user can decide to accept or reject the decision of a Wikipedia admin at ANI, then the whole process is pretty much void of meaning and purpose. Not to mention the waste of every admin's/editor's time who took the effort to go through the mess of a really long discussion to give an input. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 17:09, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to point out the same issue. Except that now I am reconsidering following your suggestions... It wouldn't feel right. Besides, there are not many people who will stand up to WCM —it's a terrible effort. And he's just back at it making way for 'his thruth' into every article. There was nothing wrong with CMD's suggestion "British re-capture", why he needed to stick his nose into it? --Langus (t) 10:27, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Am I to understand that following an admin ruling made at ANI is actually optional then? Regards. Gaba p (talk) 10:44, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh... Wee nobody is asking for you to be banned, could you settle down please? (comment deleted by Wee)
MacDui, I asked this question over at the ANI Talk page and I've been instructed that yours was just a "proposal" and not an actual ban. I believed it was mandatory but I was wrong so my question is answered. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 12:40, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted my comment as I thought better of it. That is all, you are free to have the last word as usual. Wee Curry Monstertalk 13:18, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid ANI proved to be worse than useless on this occasion - however, your collective shortcomings have been brought to the attention of a wider public and I urge you all to proceed with caution. Further transgressions may be dealt with harshly. BenMacDui 18:21, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - I will fix this asap. BenMacDui 07:37, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Could you give your opinion for moving Haakon I of Norway again on Talk:Harald II of Norway? The article actually mentions his name in the lead now and it has an Old Norse form which would indicate that it was used to refer to him at least in the sagas, if not his lifetime. --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 17:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You do not dismiss tags left by users who have more than twice as many edits as you have without checking first. Seem reasonable? Or is checking first "pointless" as well? Continually unimpressed by the "authority" figures around here, Varlaam (talk) 16:45, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not aware of this rule - or indeed too many others that ask you to behave differently towards users based on the number of their edits. I don't like these tags - they are lazy and ugly. In my experience, relating to the more obscure Scottish articles in particular, they tend to sit there for years, achieving nothing. The exception is the "citation needed" type tag that at least alerts us to the notion that the information might be erroneous or otherwise in dispute. Otherwise, if it is easy to fix - why not fix it yourself? If it isn't who do you think is going to do it? Many of these articles have a handful of over-extended watchers at most. I see we have gotten off on the wrong foot, which is a pity as I'd like to encourage your interest in Barra and environs. My apologies for any offence inadvertently caused. BenMacDui 17:01, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why not fix it myself, eh?
Because I am the senior editor at Scots WP, and I spend my time there.
I don't have time to fix every sloppy problem at English WP.
There are people who go around fixing linkrot, especially in cases like this, where only one item needs fixing, and the article involves a cool castle.
I don't believe the author should fix problems like this; authors are a rare breed.
But budding junior editors can learn their syntax by making minor corrections, but senior editors need to flag those flaws first.
This very article exists only as a stub at scowiki, so if you want to exercise your broadest Scots ...
I added a Linkrot tag to the article on the US state of Georgia.
Somebody sorted it within a matter of hours.
It does happen. Cheers, Varlaam (talk) 16:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Doubtless there are numerous Georgia enthusiasts. Please feel free to direct your acolytes to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scottish Islands/Cleanup listing. The bot stopped updating about two and a half years ago, but no few of the tags remain in place. BenMacDui 18:29, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've done some additions to the history section of Longside - all pretty boring, I'm afraid! I just wondered if you might have the time to have a quick look and maybe (just maybe.....) think it could lose the 'stub' status? Or if you have any suggestions? I'm asking you as you were very helpful to me a couple of years ago, so I hope you don't mind me pestering you!
Good work, nae problem and done. BenMacDui 18:31, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
my goodness, that was quick! Thank you! SagaciousPhil - Chat 18:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind checking over some further edits I've done on Longside - I keep playing around with it and adding bits and pieces! I've changed the headings within the History section but I'm not sure if that's the right way to do it? I'm also not sure what other type of thing should be included in small village articles? I know I will have to check the sentence 'The river Ugie flows through it' - I'm not sure when it was added or by whom but it reads to me as if it goes down the middle of the village, which it doesn't! SagaciousPhil - Chat 16:07, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're doing fine. Certainly there are things that could be improved, for example prehistory could be expanded, you could say more about local agriculture and there might be a listed building or two of note. See also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section and WP:GOODISLE. The images are a shade driech (I see the author of one is "Ken Fitlike" - very drôle.) If you want to see a good quality article about a small(ish) village, try Chew Stoke or Neilston - and there is a listing of other possible sources of inspiration at Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography#Recognised content. BenMacDui 18:43, 5 November 2012 (UTC) PS For those without the Doric, ken means "know" and is sometimes used in a similar way to the modern "innit". Fit like? is a greeting, as in ça va?[reply]
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank you, MacDui; you are always very helpful and patient. I doubt I can manage anything up to the standard of Chew Stoke or Neilston but I'll continue to try! SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:41, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are most kind and all the best with your endeavours. BenMacDui 11:43, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. You're one of the first 100 people to sign up for a free JSTOR account via the requests page. We're ready to start handing out accounts, if you'd still like one.
JSTOR will provide you access via an email invitation, so to get your account, please email me (swallingwikimedia.org) with...
the subject line "JSTOR"
your English Wikipedia username
your preferred email address for a JSTOR account
The above information will be given to JSTOR to provide you with your account, but will otherwise remain private. Please do so by November 30th or drop me a message to say you don't want/need an account any longer. If you don't meet that deadline, we will assume you have lost interest, and will provide an account to the next person in the rather long waitlist.
You are very welcome - I hope it is useful. Thanks also to Akerbeltz for sorting out my pidgin Gaelic.BenMacDui 20:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I second QuintusPetillius: a valuable article and admirably complete and well-written. The article on Donald Monro (priest) suffers a bit by comparison; I wonder if some kind of integration of the text in that article and the "Author" section of your new page might be effected. I'm not quite sure how. 45ossington (talk) 09:34, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks also. By all means cut and paste the one into the other if you feel so inspired. There is still more that could be added. I am not sure why the article was moved, without any discussion, to "Donald Monro (priest)", which seems an odd title to me. BenMacDui 09:57, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, for a better Gaelic dictionary, including the historic one Dwelly wrote, I'd use/ref the Faclair Beag, rather than Lexilogos which just cross-searches various dictionary, some more reliably than others. Akerbeltz (talk) 17:12, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK - I'll add it but must dash off now. BenMacDui 17:23, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, been a while... nice to be remembered! CatfishJim and the soapdish 20:02, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 16[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Malise mac Gilleain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mearns (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) 11:25, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, i didn't intend my message to vsmith to be a personal attack. Highly sarcastic, yes. And that is because he has called my edits blatant. Now, how i can propose of stripping him of an admin status? He is abusing his status for enforcing his personal view on the medical silver article and disregarding usage of wp:medrs. i'll refrain from anything which can be seen as a personal attack however.Ryanspir (talk) 07:09, 24 December 2012 (UTC)ryanspir[reply]
I will reply on your talk page in order to keep the thread together. BenMacDui 11:50, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
He is clearly biased and he abuses his authority. That was reported on his talk by at least one more editor for a different article as well. He has attacked me personally first, calling my edit blatant promotion. He has contributed to creating one of the most biased articles on wiki. Now, could i ask you a question please: should or not wp:medrs be used for a medical claim? Because according to vsmith it cannot. What is it? An admin who is going against the policies and disallows to use a policy merely because he uses it rare? What kind of reason is that? And the most interesting is that rs medrs are absolutely the same in regards to medical claim. But he says its not. Do i need to question my mental health then? :-) surely i can make a personal attack against myself :) because that means that i'm either blind or became so old that my thinking capacity has greatly diminished. :)Ryanspir (talk) 16:30, 24 December 2012 (UTC)ryanspir[reply]
If you are looking for assistance in your campaign to promote the use of silver as a medicinal treatment you are asking the wrong person, as I am not qualified to offer professional advice with regard to either its use or the state of your mental health. The topic appears to be of interest to WikiProject Rational Skepticism and you might find what you seek by dropping a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rational Skepticism. BenMacDui 10:05, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
was the prototype for Slartibartfast's award-winning design of Norway. I also hear that the film has had good reviews and that although it is not on release here until August, VisitScotland are getting exited. Incidentally, if the rain here keeps up I shall find myself at a loose end this summer and may finally get round to offering another island at FAC. Am I right in thinking that the galleries created by this well-meaning edit won't pass muster? Ben MacDui 08:37, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
for which Slartibartfast won his award I'll admit the draft is a pretty good one ;) Some day I hope to get to see that charming documentary on life in medieval Scotland too, but not today :P Finn Rindahl (talk) 16:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
wikimedia.org) with...
