User talk:Setanta747/Archive6

UK MOS?

I just had a glance back at the UK talk page and noticed you thought my suggestion for a UK-Manual of style was a good idea (re: billion vs thousand million). I was wondering if you'd made any movement toward creating a page for it or not - part of the UK Portal maybe..? Cheers. --Mal 06:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

No, I haven't done anything since making that comment. Do you plan to advance with the plans for a UK MoS? Matthew 09:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I had no plans to, but I had been thinking of creating a Northern Irish one. Things about English usage, number usage and distances (we use miles here obviously, while km is more prevelant in the rest of Europe).. things like that. --Mal 00:07, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd expect a large amount of overlap between a Northern Irish style guide and a British style guide. Is that a fair assumption? Matthew 09:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd say a fair overlap with both, but with the more local guide overriding both the super-category ones. Where law is concerned, and things like milese vs km, for example, NI would follow the UK-style. --Mal 10:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Northern Ireland debate

You have been involved in the flag debate on the Northern Ireland talk page. If you remember there were four option listed about the way forward. If you wish you can go here and make your position clear. regards--Vintagekits 21:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Flag debate

Mal, Please see the edit I made to your vote, I have copied it and put it a couple of lines above. We are trying to keep discussion out of that section. I hope you understand, if you disagree, please drop me a line. regards--Vintagekits 15:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Cheers. --Mal 15:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, can you trim it down to "A - unless C becomes a reality. If D gets a majority, then B will have to be put in place." Because it conveys your message and is less wordy, I just fear that your post will encourage other to discuss. regards--Vintagekits 15:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

see what I mean--Vintagekits 20:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Mal, I know you have been off line but I have taken the liberty of inserting my paraphrased version of your comment outlined above and put the full comment just above it. I have asked Martin to remove his comment also and he has done this and he put it just below your comment, you still do have the largest comment of all the !votes anyway. I know it’s a bit cheeky but I am sure you will understand why I did it because its only going to ruin the whole exercise let me know if it is still unacceptable and I will change it back. regards --Vintagekits 20:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I must object. In this case a proviso is actually contained within my vote - it is the condition under which I am even considering a vote on the matter in the first place. The fact is that the whole debate is a circular issue, which is not likely to go away. If the flag is changed or removed then someone, perhaps even myself, will soon start the debate again, a vote will take place again. The vote isn't structured particularly logically in any case. --Mal 22:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Aran sweater

On Aran sweater you have been indicating that edits by other users (including myself) removing certain external links constitute "vandalism". This is clearly a content dispute, not a case of vandalism, so please stop indicating that we are vandals. Instead, argue your case on Talk:Aran sweater. --A bit iffy 12:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

You have been engaged in a campaign to remove perfectly well sourced information from that article, for God-only-knows what reason. I consider that to be vandalistic. Please stop removing the edits and work I have done to the article. Thank you. --Mal 12:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

As I see it, I have made edits on essentially two occasions on this issue, plus associated fixes. I would not call that a campaign of vandalism. If you really think I am a vandal, make the necessary complaints to the appropriate admins or whoever deals with these matters.--A bit iffy 13:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

That's OK - I'm happy enough with just pointing it out to you. I wasn't using the word "you" in that sense by the way. --Mal 21:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mal. I've realised I should have pointed out specifically to you my request for interested parties to vote on this dispute. It's at Talk:Aran sweater#Aran and Arran - vote (though I'm guessing you may well have come across it anyway). Cheers, A bit iffy 05:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

temptest

If you want to create a test page in your user space, be sure to separate your name form the prefix with a colon. Right now, you are trying to create User Setanta747/temptest, which will show up (and be deleted) in article namespace. What yopu need is User:Setanta747/temptest. That will create your temporary page within your user space, and will be free from disruption. Denni^talk 05:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Ooops.. thanks for letting me know about my typo. I had been wondering why you were quite so insistant about deleting something in user space! :) --Mal 05:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Antrim

"Viscount Dunluce was not wikified, so I did a search for the article. As you can see if you click on the blue link, it re-directs to Earl of Antrim. Is that because every person who held one title was automatically made the holder of the other title?"

The title was created in the standard from where the two title would always be held together and by the same person:

The King has been pleased to order Letters Patent to be passed under the Great Seal of the Kingdom of Ireland, containing His Majesty's Grant of the Dignities of Viscount and Earl of the said Kingdom to the Right Honourable Randal William Earl of Antrim, and the Heirs Male of his Body lawfully begotten, by the' Name, Stile and Title of Viscount Dunluce, in the County of Antrim, and Earl of Antrim, in the said County; with Remainders to the first and every other Daughter of the Body of the said Earl, and the Heirs Male of their respective Bodies lawfully begotten. [1]

The project you are after is Wikipedia:WikiProject_Peerage. Be careful moving links to titles as there is a complex relationship you need to understand before you do.Alci12 14:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the information and for taking the time to respond regarding my query. :) Might I suggest that, if the relationships between titles are complex on Wikipedia, that they should somehow be simplified? Wikipedia editors are not necessarily experts. Perhaps a Manual of Style should be written with a link posted on each relevant article's talk page.

I trust the matter has been sorted now in any case? -- Mal 23:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Well Project peerage has on it's page a guide but even that just can't handle everything. Which peerages relate to another can become exceedingly complex with the same named title belonging to multiple people at different times or even exceptionally at the same time and with different remainders before or after they inherited the title. So the piping is not straight forward. While the article itself is not usually a problem with regard to accessibility I'm not sure there is a way to make certain technical matters simple for general users. Katherine_Villiers,_Duchess_of_Buckingham that you mentioned is a case in point. She was from birth-1620 Lady Catherine Manners from 1620-23 the Marchioness of Buckingham from '23-28 Duchess of Buckingham, '28-32 the Dowager Duchess of Buckingham, from '32 onwards she was also Baroness de Ros suo jure, from '34 Countess of Antrim from '44 marchioness of Antrim. By no means an easy woman to fit into a naming convention! She's historically most famous during her first marriage so the article creator was probably correct to put her there. Alci12 12:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Sarah777

Mal, after my latest attempt to resolve disputes with Sarah777 on the Republic of Ireland talk page, I've decided that I'm tired of constant, dogged and soul destroying attempts to convince her to debate civilly, or indeed at all without mudslinging, straw men, avoidance, obfuscation and an unrelenting refusal to meet any kind of compromise, respect consensus or honestly discuss an issue. I would like to put her behavior on Ireland-related talk pages to a Request for Comment. Before doing so, I would like to know your opinion on the matter. I've also contacted Djegan requesting his. --sony-youth^talk 22:40, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe she, along with a couple of others, have a political agenda on Wikipedia which they will not veer from. I believe this is why she will not be moved by compromise. This is evidenced by the sheer amount of disturbance she has caused on various (Ireland-related) pages throughout the 'pedia. I'd be happy to look into it a little more and try to provide an objective opinion on an RfC page, though my impression thus far is as I have just stated. -- Mal 22:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I've created a RfC at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Sarah777. Can you take a look before it "goes live." I think it can be improved. --sony-youth^talk 04:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

On a cursory look, it seems fine to me. I could take more careful look tomorrow though, unless you're planning to 'activate' it before then. -- Mal 03:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Better to take what ever time is necessary and do it right. It will require a second signiture. Would you be willing to add that? Make sure its sometime you can agree with first. --sony-youth^talk 07:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Gerry McGeough

Could you outline your concerns on this article please. Weggie 11:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I think I included a comment in the article text. I'll have another look later though. -- Mal 13:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I've updated the article to reflect your comment as it was a good call Weggie 13:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I wasn't quite sure, nor sure about how best to re-word it, which is why I didn't attempt to change it. -- Mal 14:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

UDA

Can I get some input on the UDA talk page please, especially as you requested the cites to begin with? I'm not keen on being bold and making a decision one way or the other in terms of combined/seperate figures. Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 07:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a look, though I suspect I tagged it as part of my work for the NI WikiProject and had just noticed that it lacked any references while passing through a host of NI-related articles. -- Mal 13:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I've just responded to your comments to the best of my ability anyway. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 11, March 2007

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter Issue 011 – March 2007
Beatles News On February 5, 2007, the Beatles' Apple Corps and Apple, Inc. (Apple Computer) announced a settlement of their latest trademark dispute involving use of the Apple trademark on the iTunes Music Store. In May of 2006, the High Court ruled in favor of Apple, but Neil Aspinall, manager of Apple Corps, vowed to appeal. Evidently, in the intervening months, the two companies negotiated a settlement. The settlement is discussed in this AP story. For background on the case, see Apple Corps v. Apple Computer. For fans, this may mean that Beatle music will be available someday on iTunes. Despite rumors of a February 2007 release, the material is still unavailalble. The divorce case between Paul McCartney and his estranged wife Heather Mills McCartney has begun with a preliminary hearing in the London High Court on March 1, 2007. See the McCartneys Have Their First Court Date. Chronicle Books has reissued I, Me, Mine, the 1980 George Harrison autobiography. See details in the editors page Project News The articles Freddie Lennon, Julia Lennon, Mimi Smith, Neil Aspinall and Mal Evans have all been promoted to Good Article status. The identity of the individual largely responsible for this outcome remains a mystery, but anyone correctly identifying said person will be treated to dinner with Sir Sean de Garde (cost of meal, air tickets, hotel and trips to houses of ill-repute will be borne by the Mighty Crestville). There were no Project article adoptions for the month of February. One new article has been listed in the Project Log since 1 February; namely The New World Tour, relating to the 1993 World Tour by Paul McCartney, created by the Project's Macca/Wings tours resident expert Danthemankhan. The hottest Project pages this month have been.... Julia Lennon, Freddie Lennon, Neil Aspinall, and Mal Evans, which are now all GA, and Mimi Smith, which has been peer reviewed to see if it could be FA. Project Policy has now been altered to reflect that the use of lowercase for the letter "t" of the word "the" in the Beatles is now considered the correct rendition. Member News New members to the project since the last issue include (although the first is a long time contributor who apparently has only just found the Participants section); Tvoz Freshacconci Liamshaw John Cardinal Mezlo ErleGrey Captain Waters Hey jude, don't let me down Apepper has been awarded a Barnstar for his considerable contributions to The Beatles' influence on music recording. LessHeard vanU has also acquired two Barnstars, and a WikiFish(!), mostly due to undue influence.	Issue of the Month See below. There is genuine concern that the Newsletter is getting stale in terms of content and variety, and that the same individuals are featured each month. Furthermore, lack of "news" is hindering the timely distribution as the editors wait for something to report. All Project editors are encouraged to give their news, suggestions and thoughts to keep the 'Letter vital and interesting. If making direct contributions do not appeal, please give a mention on the Newsletter talkpage and it will be incorporated! From the Editors Help is needed for the job of putting future Newsletters together. The present incumbent is finding it difficult to reflect the breadth of the Project, focusing on much the same individuals and articles each month, and has decided to beg for contributions from other individuals. Interested persons need only start working on next months issue to qualify. It really is that simple! If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy! Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 012 – April 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing! Contributors to this Issue lEaD ediTor (Lead Editor) John Cardinal (Editor) LessHeard vanU (Editor) Lar (Editor, Distributor) Alexcalamaro (Editor)
Complete To Do List Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively. Open tasks for WikiProject The Beatles. Edit or discuss these tasks. As the project is currently just starting, our more experienced editors are working on the project infrastructure, classifying articles, and listing/assessing red links. Your assistance is welcome. If you would prefer to just edit - and why wouldn't you? - we have a choice selection of red links to turn blue and articles to clean! Now let's get busy. To Expand: Apple Records See also: Adopt an article To Clean up: Apple Records discography (wikify). The Beatles' 1965 USA Tour. To Merge: To Create: Phil McDonald (engineer). Lennon/McCartney songs: I'll Keep You Satisfied (produced by George Martin), From A Window. George Martin produced Billy J. Kramer song: Magic Carpet (song). Songs covered by The Beatles: Hippy Hippy Shake. The Big Three. Bag o'Nails, where Paul met Linda. Macca single: My Brave Face. Articles on each Beatle tour (Category:The Beatles tours). Full list & instructions. Lists to complete: Wanted Pics/Graphics: Mal Evans, Flying (song), Astrid Kirchherr, Jimmy Nicol, Cynthia Powell, Alistair Taylor, Ivan Vaughan, Tittenhurst Park, Tony Barrow. We need a better open-licenced photo for the project, to replace the Abbey Road crossing. If you provide a photo, please remove the ReqPhoto tag from the article's talk page and remove the article from this list. Project Discussions: The Beatles history, Individual songs vs longer album articles, Beatle wives, Merge/split proposals Project: Add {{WPBeatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members, and coordinate tasks. Enter articles classed as stubs into this list (under To Expand) and also list articles needing cleaning and other work here. If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log.

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

delivered by ++Larbot - run by User:Lar - t/c 23:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

List of British flags

Please keep a watch on this article. They have removed the Northern Ireland flag to the historical section and deleted references to where it is currently used. Thanks Astrotrain 16:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you explain why you ignored the discussion in the List of British flags talk page, but reverted the last edit to remove the errors in that article. The Ulster Banner is not the Offical National Flag of Northern Ireland, it is already included in the Historical National Flag section of the article where it belongs. I also see that Astrotrain, contacted you to get you to edit the article, this is after I warned him I would report him for vandalising edits to that article.--padraig3uk 20:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, I didn't revert the article. I added the Northern Ireland flag as it was missing from the list of regional flags.

Secondly, I never claimed that the flag was either official, or unofficial.

Thirdly, Astrotrain is perfectly within his rights to alert people concerned about a political agenda to diminish the coverage of Northern Ireland on Wikipedia, as some users appear to be intent on currently. If the flag is removed again, I shall re-add it. -- Mal 16:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Mal the flag has been removed and for good reason - it is not the Flag of Northern Ireland - this is clearly set out in the article provided. We all know each others positions with regards this issue but it would be good if we could come up with some resolutions.--Vintagekits 16:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, the flag has not been removed. There is a protection in place because of the political agenda that has turned into an edit war.

The flag of Northern Ireland is indeed the flag of Northern Ireland. Ironically, you point to the article on Wikipedia that describes the flag of Northern Ireland when you state it is not the flag of Northern Ireland.

There are no resolutions save that of creating another flag of Northern Ireland. Until that time, the flag of Northern Ireland remains the flag of Northern Ireland and belongs in a list of British flags. -- Mal 16:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The Ulster Banner is not an Offical Flag and therefore should not be promoted as such, the flag is a former national flag and therefore is included in the Historical National Flags section of the article. It is not the flag of Northern Ireland and hasn't been for 35yrs, that is the fact of the matter. --padraig3uk 16:36, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Also the article was protected, because I requested that it be protected to stop a edit war, with users that ignored the discussion in the talk page.--padraig3uk 16:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Again, for the hard-of-reading: nobody has claimed the flag of Northern Ireland is the "official flag" (whatever that means in Common Law!) in that article. The flag of Northern Ireland is still used to represent Northern Ireland in international events and so is plainly recognised as representing Northern Ireland. It is also one of the major regions of the UK, and for these two reasons it belongs where it has stayed in that article, uninterrupted for likely quite some time (until political agendists noticed it) - with the other regional flags. Those are the facts.

As for the 'discussion' on the talk page - it is no more than what has taken place here. All that being said, I'd rather not have my talk page cluttered with political propaganda: please do not leave a message on my talk page regarding this issue again. Any further messages about it on this talk page will be deleted. I'm sure you understand. -- Mal 17:07, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Political compass

I like the political compass userbox you have on your user page! Are there instructions around on how to use them?

I'm also presuming you've joined Template talk:Infobox UK place via the posts to the WikiProjects? Apologies this wasn't done sooner. Jhamez84 13:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem, and thanks for the notification. :)

The political compass, as with most things really, was an idea I nicked from someone else! Basically you go to the website: politicalcompass.org and take the quiz and it gives you values. Plug those into the userbox template: {{User:The Thadman/Userbox/PolCompass|-4.25|-2.36}} ...and yer done! :)

Feel free to yoink! anything from my userboxes page. -- Mal 14:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Project ratings

Sorry, didn't cross my mind. I assume I'm better off just doing the quality (stub, start etc) not the importance for other projects? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 23:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

No probs. By all means do the quality - it might be harder to judge how important an article is to a given project so, unless the subject is uber-important (I think that's the first time I've applied the "uber" modifier in my life!) or you know the project area well, I suppose just leave the other field blank. Articles relating to Northern Ireland in particular are in need of as much help as possible, as are the two WikiProjects (Belfast and NI). Cheers. -- Mal 02:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Will do. Just I could possibly see some people getting a bit upset if I started rating IRA members as high priority for the NI and Belfast projects. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 02:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh! Well, if in doubt, leave it out.. or something! :) If its currently topical (in the news) then maybe you could take a stab at rating it high or mid or something.. these things can always be changed later. I have to go watch the Australian F1 qualifying now! -- Mal 02:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Nosferatu image

Look here for a bunch Nosferatu images on the Commons. I'm not sure which one I deleted from Wikipedia. Adding an image from the Commons is just like adding and image on Wikipedia. Enclose the filename inside double brackets with other standard image information (Example - [[Image:Orlock.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Max Schreck starring as Count Orlok in the movie "Nosferatu."]]). -Regards Nv8200p talk 14:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Hello. You may be interested, and wish to pass comment here. :) Jhamez84 22:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ryan Harpur

I responded to your query that you placed on my talk page. My response can be found here. If the message isn't on my talk page, please see the archives for the time period of your original message. Feel free to post any further comments on my talk page, and I'll respond to you as soon as possible. Cheers, –Daniel Bryant 06:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Northern Ireland map

Hello again,

I noticed your comments left at the UK place infobox talk page. I'm also a (part-time) graphic artist developing maps for Wikipedia.

I've actually been working on a new map for Northern Ireland (as well as Wales) for a couple of days - I was wondering about two things really...

Assuming you've seen my work on the Greater Manchester, Cheshire, South Yorkshire, and other such infobox maps, would it be more appropriate for a NI infobox map to be divided by the Districts of Northern Ireland, the Counties of Northern Ireland or neither?

Also, do you know of any online maps that show the settlements/urban areas of Northern Ireland? I'm very keen to help here, or, given you also produce images, perhaps collaborate (I can send you some of my raw PNG samples)? Jhamez84 22:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for such a rapid response. I do have e-mail switched on yes! If you're interested you can e-mail me, but given the amount of strange people I've encountered here, I don't and won't post it directly on Wikipeda, as I'm sure you can appreciate!

Trouble with the jpeg format, is, it is what's rather unknown as a lossy file format - the image quality deteriorates with various types usage (saving, uploads, viewing). PNG is a more stable file format designed to combat digitial data loss from images - trouble is, nobody really knows (or would have reason to) unless they are familliar with digitisation theory and practice, which is incredibly boring....

However, I've uploaded a prototype image here. Of course, if it is not used in the infobox (no problem if not), it may have use elsewhere, but thought you may want to see the approach I'd be keen to adopt. I haven't added any divisions of NI either - these may be required to establish a geographic reference frame for readers, possibly? I've used Adobe Illustrator and Adobe Photoshop in combination. Jhamez84 01:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:NI_Sat_relief_with_detail_1024.png

Thanks for uploading Image:NI_Sat_relief_with_detail_1024.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Deleted categories

Hi, Mal. I've responded to your comment about the deleted categories at WT:WHO#Categories. The full explanation is there, but in short: it's a bad idea to recreate categories that have been deleted through WP:CFD — such recreated categories will probably be speedily deleted. Sorry — I agree that these deletions were a bad move, but we're in a minority on this, and recreating the categories won't work. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 09:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Football AID 15 - 22 April

Thank you for participating in the Football AID vote this week.

Bernd Schuster has been selected as this week's collaboration. Please do help in working to improve it.

List of British Flags 2

There is a discussion on this issure on the talk page, please try debating the issue there rather then engaging in a edit war, the same with the Template:UKFlags.--padraig3uk 20:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sick of 'debating' the issue Padraig. You, and a couple of others, seem to only be interested in a political edit war regarding the representation not only of the flag, but even of Northern Ireland itself. I'm here to present facts as accurately a possible, and the fact is that the flag is NOT historical - it is still used to represent Northern Ireland. There is nothing you can do to change that fact, other than by using your vote in Northern Ireland to vote for a political party that will endeavour to ensure the design and adoption of a replacement flag (assuming you have a vote in Northern Ireland - I don't know where you're from).

I have made the reason for my reverts obvious in my edit comments.

I do hope you're not edit-stalking me by the way, or eliciting help in order to 'play' the WP:3RR rule. --Mal 20:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes I am from Northern Ireland, the Northern Ireland that dosen't have a national flag, and the one that is not represented by the Ulster banner for the past 35yrs in any manner. This flag is not offical, therefore we don't need to wait until a new flag is agreed within Northern Ireland to have it replaced on WP, the flag is historical.--padraig3uk 21:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Northern Ireland clearly has a flag - its the Flag of Northern Ireland. I don't see how you could live in Northern Ireland and not have noticed.

You're going round in circles - the NI government hasn't used the flag for a long time, but the flag itself is still used to represent Northern Ireland. Therefore, it is not "historical". And you might have noticed that Wikipedia is not the NI government! --Mal 11:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Breach of WP:3RR on List of British flags

I will give you a chance to self revert if you want it. regards--Vintagekits 20:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Gee thanks! How generous of you to lure me into a trap and then try to appear to be generous. No thanks. I'll give the both of you the chance to stop being so politically and bloody-minded though. Feel free to revert yourself. --Mal 20:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

No one lured you into anything, you are an experienced editor and know who wiki works. You have also been rpeviously blocked for a breach of WP:3RR of the Northern Ireland page so you should know. I will give you one more opportunity to self revert before I report you. regards--Vintagekits 21:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid you basically 'ganged up' - as per usual. And don't have the cheek to bring up past actions taken against me please - that was done in the same bloody way. Besides which, as you very well know, the Northern Ireland page is an extremely controversial one in Wikipedia.

Don't leave any more messages on my talk page, as you obviously don't know how to be respectful. --Mal 11:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I would say informing you of your breach and giving you the chance to self revert rather than reporting you for the breach was an extremely civil and respectful approach.--Vintagekits 11:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I would say soliciting help (not you - the other editor in question), pestering me on my talk page, threatening me with policy, repeating yourself and not listening to other opinion, and having a pretty obnoxious attitude really .. all that mounts up to not being either civil or respectful. You have also ignored my request to not leave any more messages on my talk page. Please respect this at least! --Mal 11:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I have just seen this Mal, who are you refering to about soliciting help, if that is aimed at me, I resent your allegation I have the articles in question on my watchlist as Iam sure others have as well, in fact I ask you to stop editing the articles and discuss the issue on the talk page here, which you refused to do.--padraig3uk 09:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm referring to both of you really, regarding the solicitation of help. It is more than merely an allegation - it is plain fact. Here is a link to the solicitation in question: User talk:Padraig3uk#seen this?, and a link to the date and time on which you requested the assistance.--Mal 10:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I am really taken aback by you abusive attitude, I have been nothing but civil towards you and do not appriciate your personal attack.--Vintagekits 11:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

You haven't specified what you regard to be a personal attack. I regard your attitude as being, as I've already said, of a threatening manner. You are still ignoring my request to desist from leaving messages on my talk page. --Mal 10:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

What is that link suppose to prove, I requested the deletion of the article, Vintagekits supports its retention, but going by the edits of you today on that article you seem to be promoting your own POV in the article which supports my reason for asking for it to be deleted.--padraig3uk 10:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Padraig, I humbly apologise for mistaking your edit to Vintagekits' talk page as soliciting help for luring me into a breach of WP:3RR. You were merely drawing his attention to my creation of a new article. I mis-read the link.

As for the article itself - my edit to it was to remove extraneous information from it. There was no POV in the article to begin with, and POV is not reason enough to have an article deleted. There are at least three other articles similar to it, none of which I believe have been nominated for deletion for NPOV or anything else. Please refer to them for style. --Mal 22:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• Mal, Firstly may I remind you that you do not own your talk page. You have crossed the line on in this discussion and I have reported you to Tyrenius for it also. You started off with a breach of WP:3RR and then instead of taking some good and genuine advice you then breached WP:AGF then WP:CIVIL and topped off with WP:NPA. You are not going to get away with this andI disgusted by your behaviour here to be honest - you've made your bed and now you are going to have to lie in it.--Vintagekits 11:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

You may not remind me of anything, and you may not continue with your obnoxious tone. I have asked you politely to not communicate with me on my talk page, yet you ignore my request and continue to flare. What exactly is it that I am "not going to get away with"? I have not continuously pestered you on your talk page, despite a request to stop. I have not continuously threatened you with action regarding WP policy. I'm not going to revert an edit which has already been reverted by you or your buddy-at-arms - what would be the point in that? The article (BOTH the articles in fact) are back to the nonsensical state they were before I made my edits. You refused to take into account the reasons I gave for the edits in both my edit summaries and subsequently in the talk page.

If all you are interested in is disruption, by diverting an editor's attention from useful edits and making a mountain out of a molehill, then I suggest you have clearly suceeded. You have managed to exacerbate the situation, despite my "advice" that you cease communicating with me on my talk page.

I'm afraid it is I who is disgusted by your attitude here: you do not appear to listen. And what's this shite about making my bed and lying in it? What kind of inane babble is that? Another threat? Please! STOP COMMUNICATING WITH ME ON MY TALK PAGE - PLEASE! --Mal 22:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Please strike through your personal attacks and I will then remove my report regarding your breaches of several policies. This is the last chance I am going to give you, I politley suggest you accept.--Vintagekits 22:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Northern Irish flags

An editor has nominated List of Northern Irish flags, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Northern Irish flags and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 19:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Resilient Barnstar
		For incredible patience and restraint. Kittybrewster (talk) 08:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Female Model Bio

Template:Infobox Female Model Bio has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.

NB: This TfD nomination is based on the fact that we already have {{Infobox Model}}, which is better documented anyway, and not because of any dispute over sexism. — Kelvinc 09:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Help required

{{helpme}}

Does anyone know why my style seems to have disappeared in Firefox over the last day or so, though I can still see the left-hand frame etc in iExplorer..? Thanks in advance. --Mal 05:49, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

It's possible that when you were browsing with Firefox, the server accidentally sent you a bad stylesheet (this happens on occasion). If that's the problem, bypassing your cache whilst using Firefox (Ctrl-F5 on Windows) should sort it out. Otherwise, it's possible that a script you are using is trying to change your stylesheet in an IE-specific way; try blanking your monobook.js and bypassing your cache again (you can revert to a last-known-good version if this is the problem). If neither of these solutions work, WP:VPT is probably a good place to find people who might know what the problem is. --ais523 07:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I actually rebooted, and that undoubtedly refreshed the cache. My machine had been on constantly for about ninety million days, and was in 'need' of a reboot anyhow. :) Thanks for providing an invaluable service by the way. --Mal 08:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

User Ireland

Hi - haven't a clue, I thought the problem was just on my end! Just asked on the #wikipedia IRC channel but no luck, perhaps a bug report should be filed with the developers via bugzilla? --Kwekubo 11:31, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to look at a few links first - its used for Ireland-related stubs. --Mal 13:32, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

News Time

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter Issue 012 – April 2007
Beatles News On Friday 30th March, a deranged fan was held after attempting to force his way into Paul McCartney's mansion. See here for more details. Apple Corps continues to make news, after the recent settlement with Apple Computer over the use of the Apple trademark. On April 10th, the company announced that long-time chief executive Neil Aspinall had stepped down and had been replaced by American Jeff Jones. It was also announced that another long term dispute, this time with EMI over royalties, had been amicably settled prior to Aspinall's departure.[2][3] Project News The article "Jeff Jones (music industry executive)" suddenly becomes of top importance in the Apple sphere of Beatledom. User:Kingboyk has created a stub on the man, but the article needs urgent beefing up (including basic biographical data such as date and place of birth) and, if possible, a photograph of the new Apple chief executive. Mimi Smith promises to have the last word over John yet again; her article is currently a Featured Article Candidate. Brian Epstein is a current GA candidate. See the Status board for more article news. 2 new articles have been listed in the Project Log since 1 March: Tony Barrow and Jeff Jones (music industry executive). With the debate over "the Beatles" vs "The Beatles" continuing to cause ill feeling and a number of resignations from the project from advocates on both sides, Kingboyk attempted to diffuse the situation by blanking the Project Policy page and tagging it as {{historical}}. Although this unilateral action hasn't been reverted as of the time of writing, the reaction was mixed, with two members rejoining the project and others stating their disagreement. With the issue still not resolved, the page was sent to Miscellany for Deletion, for the wider community (and WikiProject The Beatles members) to consider the issue. Member News The membership list has been trimmed, with inactive members listed seperately to help gauge the status of the project. If you've been incorrectly listed as inactive, please don't be offended - just move yourself back to the main list.	The Rutles: The legendary group who inspired lesser imitators like "The Beatles". WikiWorld, March 2007 From the Editors This has been a tumultuous month for the project yet again. We need your input on how the project should work and what it's role should be. And we need to start getting Featured Articles, folks! :) Next issue This is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 013 – May 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing! Contributors to this Issue Kingboyk (Lead Editor) Andresguacamayo (Editor)
Complete To Do List Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

BetacommandBot 23:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Ian_Adamson.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ian_Adamson.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 01:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Football AID 29 April - 6 May

Thank you for participating in the Football AID vote this week.

Northern Ireland national football team has been selected as this week's collaboration. Please do help in working to improve it.

Guam

Surely you are willing to accept the odd pacific Island into NI.... Ummm well if you don't want it ... I'll move it. How did I do it? Copy and paste and pick up extra stuff on the copy. Hope it amused rather than annoyed. Victuallers 20:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Arthur Chichester

Hi Mal, I've been writing an article on Arthur Chichester. For some reason all the talk pages with the Belfast Wikiproject banner on it link to the new Chichester article. Can't quite figure it out! See here. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 10:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

lol! Weird! I'm having a look now. The only thing I can think of at the min is that the Belfast WP template has been changed in some way. --Mal 10:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

OK - the {{tl:WPBelfast}} template has been changed recently, but I'm not sure any of the changes made would have caused this to happen. I'm going to revert the changes (made on the 18th of April) temporarily just to rule that out.

I noticed the same problem with the article Shankill Road, Belfast. Incidentally, is there any need to have Shankill Road redirect to that article? It seems to me that Shankill Road is unique and that it should own the Shankill Road article. A new disambig article, Shankill should probably be made instead. What do you think? --Mal 11:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Weird indeed. And yes, the article should sit at Shankill Road. Think that has to be done through Wikipedia:Requested moves? Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 11:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. I also asked the advice of Kingboyk, who knows a fair bit about the inner workings of Wikipedia, regarding the prob with the links. --Mal 11:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... not sure at the moment. Will investigate. --kingboyk 16:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

It's linked from {{Belfast tasks}}, which the WikiProject template transcludes. --kingboyk 16:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for investigating that buddy. :) Its just something that needs to be kept up to date obviously. I'll get to that when I have some time later. --Mal 23:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Citation demanded

Let me explain this very simply, so that you will understand it. In the following sentence, no claim is being made: Another tribe with a similar name but with no known links were the Fir Domnann in the province of Connacht. What would a citation consist of? Now, if a connection were being asserted, then you'd need to know why, and a citation would support the claim. Do you see how that works? --Wetman 14:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

First of all, how dare you take such a patronising tone with me?!

Secondly, the same thing that was being claimed before your edit, is being claimed after your edit: the Fir Domnann is simply another name for the Latinised Domnainn. The article for this states that they are "probaby related". The article, as it stood, claimed that they have "no known links".

Do you see how that works? --Mal 14:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

So, a demand for a citation is pointless. Irresponsible demands for citations is harassment. Do you see how that works?--Wetman 20:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Please watch your attitude with me - you are coming across as being very abrasive.

Also, I consider myself to be a diligent editor - not an "irresponsible" one. I haven't engaged in "harassment". I explained my reason for requesting a citation and I explained my reason for replacing it after your edit. --Mal 20:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

UserBox I Thought You Might Like

User:Beano ni/UserBoxes/NIFlagInWikipedia Given recent events I thought it seemed appropriate. beano 11:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Beano. I'm going to add that in a minute. I was going to look at the state of the 'debate' on the Northern Ireland talk page, but the text looks huge (and therefore unreadable) for some reason. I suspect my PC needs rebooting, but I was wondering if you'd noticed the same thing with both the article its talk page. --Mal 12:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, come to think of it, have there been any new developments in the last few days..? --Mal 12:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Beano, I've been using it for nearly a week! cheers.--Vintagekits 20:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Northern Ireland

I have created a idea for a template for use on the Northern Ireland House of Commons elections and members articles Here and would like your opinion on it and any suggestions you may have on the content, there are currently a few of the members elected lists missing but I plan to add these over the next few weeks.--padraig3uk 13:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

First impression, looks good to me Padraig. Are there any similar templates to compare it with? (I am strongly of the belief that Wikipedia should be consistant) I would question whether a separate article would be needed for a new article entitled Northern Ireland 1921-72 though, although I can see how an article called Politics and government of Northern Ireland 1921-72 might serve well as a description and cache for all the inter-related articles. --Mal 13:42, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I based it on the current Politics of Northen Ireland one thats used for the Assembly here so that it would be consistant, the Northern Ireland 1921-72 title comes from the template that it is based on and could be altered to something else, same with the Politics and government of Northern Ireland 1921-72.--padraig3uk 13:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Could you have a look at this 1st Government of Northern Ireland these were known officially as the Executive Committee of the Privy Council of Northern Ireland, of which there were six between 1921-72, I currently have the template setup to link to these as the X Government of Northern Ireland but am not sure if this is the best way to title them. What do you think in regards to the title, etc.--padraig3uk 00:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Help request

It seems somebody has vandalised an image which affects the following three pages:

• Williamite War in Ireland
• The Twelfth
• Orange Institution

The image used to be of Orangemen parading, but has been replaced by a politically-charged and sectarian image of Tweety wielding a baseball bat, covered with acronyms of Irish Republican terrorist organisations and the message "Huns beware" ('hun' being a pejorative term for Protestants in the UK).

The image in question can be found here, and I could revert it as the edit history seems to have disappeared.

• (del) (cur) 19:16, 4 May 2007 . . Rsheppard769 (Talk | contribs) . . 500×373 (58,081 bytes)
• (del) (rev) 19:15, 4 May 2007 . . Rsheppard769 (Talk | contribs) . . 500×373 (58,081 bytes)

If you fix this, please let me know exactly what had been done to the image. Thanks.

--Mal 20:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

What happened is that the image File:Orangemen.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) was deleted per WP:CSD#I7, and then Rsheppard769 (talk · contribs) uploaded a crude caricature in its place, i.e., using the same file name. I deleted the caricature, warned the user and removed the image links from the articles. Deleting requires admin rights, but any user can do the latter two. Sandstein 20:25, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

That seems rather opportunistic. I wonder when the image had been deleted. Thanks for your full explaination. :) --Mal 20:29, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

To follow up on your question on my talk, according to the image log the original image was uploaded by Stubacca (talk · contribs). The source they provided in the now-deleted image page (which is invisible to you) was http://www.storysouth.com/summer2004/images/orangemen.jpg. If you own the copyright on it, or on a comparable encyclopedic image, you are welcome to upload it to our central media repository, Wikimedia Commons, under a free licence. Sandstein 20:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

How is this even possible? I thought wikipedia was designed in such a way that archives/histories were maintained! beano 22:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

It is. The deletion log, which is visible to all, tracks the image's creations and deletions. However, once the image is deleted, the image description page (which contains the source) is deleted with it; deleted pages remain visible only to administrators. Sandstein 05:54, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Cheers!

Thanks for the star! I've a long way to go to reach your standards. I wish I had more time to work on stuff. Give me a couple of months and Belfast should be up to FA standard. Tsumo^@ 18:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Not at all - I just threw together a couple of WikiProjects based on the hard work of others. You've been doing the actual work of assessing and creating etc! :) Good news about the Belfast article. I may help out with the aid of the auto peer review tool. Keep your eye on Belfast's talk page. --Mal 19:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

What a diff!

That's some diff! Great job! I look forward to editing with you. —ScouterSig 16:35, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Although it was just a minor few corrections for style and grammar I think. --Mal 19:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Long scale/short scale

I'm intrigued by the Long scale/short scale notation you added to Incident (Scientology), but how do we know for sure which Hubbard intended? He was very British-oriented in his thinking, which would make me tend to agree that he was thinking Long scale, but how can we say for sure? wikipediatrix 19:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

He was born in the USA and undoubtedly have been taught with the short scale number system. I added clarification based on that assumption. Without my assumption, the article remains vague. Feel free to verify that Hubbard used the Short Scale throughout his writings. Cheers. --Mal 19:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but he was an extreme anglophile and invariably used British spellings and measurements (such as Hogshead). Until we know for sure - and I'm not sure we can - it would be original research to declare it one way or the other in the article. wikipediatrix 19:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Celtic tribes in Britain and Ireland

Hello Setanta. Would it be possible for you to change the title of the above article, ommitting the Celtic bit? While the culture of many of the inhabitants of these islands at that time could be described as Celtic, only a very few of them were actualy of ethnic Celtic origin, and were never described as such by contempory reports. Nor is there any reference in their many suriviving sources to them describing themselves as Celts (I know, I looked, long and hard, and in vain!). I do understand that there is a great deal of confusion over the bedeviled term Celtic and what it means, so maybe we could do our bit to make a start. I'd do it myself but I'm mostly retired from Wiki. By the way, I find your idea of a new flag of Northern Ireland fascinating; I think we should do the same thing done here (our Presidental standard is my favorite). What would you change them too? Is mise, Fergananim 21:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I agree with you about the article 100%, and I'd thought of this before myself. I don't think I could change it myself as such a change might attract controversy, but I'll certainly nominate it for renaming. I'll possibly do that this weekend, and I'll leave a message on your talk page to let you know, so that you can vote.

Possibilities I can think of would be, simply, Tribes in Britain and Ireland or Ancient tribes in Britain or Ireland.

NI flag: I think the flag in the userbox is one possibility. Certainly it should very definately be something that removes the crown symbol from it and, from my own point of view, something that looks a little less like St George's Cross. I like the one in the infobox on my userpage because it includes reference to Patrick's saltire, and the red hand - an ancient symbol of Ulster which has often been misused. I kind of like the Ulster Nation flag, though I'm not sure I agree with its politics or connotations - I like the design of it.

My understanding is that the six-pointed star is another thing which is objected to in certain quarters, so I'd have no problem in its omission. Have you any ideas yourself? --Mal 22:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

National Institute for Higher Education

With respect Setanta747 you could do the very sensible thing and redirect NIHE to NIHE (disambiguation)? And while your at it actually create content in Northern Ireland Housing Executive which seems to be your main focus and is subject to 500+ articles (although many are talk pages but non-the-less it proves that NIHE redirecting to National Institute for Higher Education maybe a no-no anyhow. Djegan 16:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I thought I had already redirected NIHE. Nevertheless though, I think the Higher Education institute article needs a note, as I said, to point out the fact that there is another thing that shares its acronym. --Mal 16:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I dont believe their is any guideline or policy that requires it to be used, indeed having a look here gives an idea on its appropriateness. The template:this maybe quite appropriate if their was several articles with the name "National Institute for Higher Education" for instance a book, play, whatever but it should not be considered a replacement for redirect as seen in FBI. In any case more articles link to Northern Ireland Housing Executive than National Institute for Higher Education so the redirect should be to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, not the other way around! Templates, such as these, should be used spearingly. Djegan 16:46, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

You did redirect but it was a double-link and I updated it correctly, but some anon has since decided that NIHE should be for National Institute for Higher Education. I suggest that NIHE should point to the disambiguation page directly (I will watchlist NIHE) and the template:this be removed from National Institute for Higher Education. Djegan 16:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

OK DJ(?), that seems fine. I corrected the NIHE redirect again. Feel free to remove the this template from the other article then. I'm not sure I know enough about the Northern Ireland Housing Executive to create an article on it, though I had thought of starting it some time (thus my mucking about with template and redirects and my typo too!). Its on the NI WikiProject's to-do list, which is accessable from any of the talk-page tags. Cheers. --Mal 19:53, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:M assasing.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:M assasing.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Jim_Rodgers.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jim_Rodgers.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:SMB abracadabra single cover.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:SMB abracadabra single cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Ulster Says No Stub

Thanks for adding the template, I'm still getting the hang of things here. I'll work on getting the cites tomorrow. -- MichiganCharms 02:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

No probs - great work on getting it started. --Mal 03:05, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Please stop adding controversial flag for "nationality" in infoboxes

You've been referred to at least three four different talk pages where it is very clear that that an overwhelming majority of editors here believe it is a very bad idea to add the Ulster Banner - a highly politicized, unofficial flag - to infoboxes as an indicator of nationality. Please stop. Citing non-Northern Irish "counterexamples" is entirely missing the point. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 15:35, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The flag of Northern Ireland is no more or less "unofficial" than the flags of Wales, St George or St David.

Please stop removing it, and stop promoting your particular POV. If you object to the flags then be balanced about them - do not single out one specific flag.

You, I'm afraid, are the one who is missing the point. --Mal 20:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mal. I see your comments above and have to disagree. As you know, the UK law has its basis in common law, the flags of St.s. George and David were the flags of the kingdoms of Engalnd and Scotland and continued to be used in common with the first and second Union Flag after union. There are agreed by consensus to be the flags of their respective nations are acknowledged as such by the UK government. The flag of Wales was was granted official status in 1959.

Putting the UB back in without discussing it on the talk page, even though you are well aware of the fuss that it will cause, doesn't do your argument much good. Personally, I don't see much wrong with it so long as it is clearly marked that these are former flags and coats of arms (which, officially, they are, and the number of occasions where they are not is quite limited and date to organizations were the symbols for their use were defined before the poroguation of the NI govt. and, for one reason or another have not been changed since). Have it in by all means, but just be honest that it is the "former" flag and arms, not least because I think doing so will serve your case better. --sony-youth^pléigh 10:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Sony. I feel you're ignoring the fact that the flag of Northern Ireland continues to represent Northern Ireland as there is no other flag of Northern Ireland in existence currently. I have discussed the issue with SMcCandlish, on a couple of different pages now I believe.

Hang on .. I'm confused - are we talking about the removal of the flag of Northern Ireland from the Alex Higgins article, or the removal of the flag of Northern Ireland from the Northern Ireland article..?

According to the Wikipedia article regarding the coat of arms of Northern Ireland, the coat of arms was granted in 1924, the supporters granted the following year, the compartment in 1971, and none of that has ever been rescinded.

The case is the same for the flag of Northern Ireland - the government ceased to exist, but the flag still represents Northern Ireland uniquely. There is nothing "former" about either of them. There is (or certainly was, when I last edited the Northern Ireland article) a (quite prominent) note directing the readers to the page regarding the Northern Ireland flag issue, which explains the situation a lot better than messing up the infobox could ever do. I'm sure that's particularly adequate. So I was being genuine when I replied to you that I wasn't being dishonest in my edit summary. --Mal 11:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, come on, when the UK govt. says that "The union flag is the only official flag that represents Northern Ireland" (after having talked about the flags of ENG/SCO/WAL in their official capacities), its pretty unequivical. Maybe "former" is not quite accurate either, as the flag and arms were never granted to the entity described in the article, but it is misleading to our readers to present the UB as the flag of Northern Ireland (or the arms likewise), when - in contrast the the flags of ENG/SCO/WAL, NI's "sister" articles as you put it - the UB has no official capacity and no popular consensus, with the exception of a handful of sporting bodies. --sony-youth^pléigh 11:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, come on, when the Northern Ireland flag is the only flag that has uniquely represented Northern Ireland, it's pretty unequivical.

It's misleading to our readers to suggest that Northern Ireland has no flag that represents it. The flag has popular consensus, and is used in international sporting bodies as well as other national and international organisations. It has every bit as much standing as the flags that represent England, Scotland and Wales, given that they are also constituent countries with their own flags, and given the 'common law' status of those flags. --Mal 23:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

"It's misleading to our readers to suggest that Northern Ireland has no flag that represents it." - but having it in the infobox makes it look official. I'm not opposed to it being there so long as its clearly marked as official between certain dates and de facto (or something better) otherwise.

"The flag has popular consensus ..." - ?!

"It has every bit as much standing as the flags that represent ..." The legal situation was clearly stated by the UK government.

I can see we're irreconsibable on some matters, but, to be honest with you - good luck. I thought the decision last time around was very poor and was surprised at the collapse of the "defense". Maybe now it will arrive at a better arrangement. I think your note about the union flag, etc. is a good addition and a good approach to settling this issue. --sony-youth^pléigh 08:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[UNINDENT] "but having [the NI flag] in the infobox makes it look official." By whose account? This is an encyclopedia, not a government website.

"I'm not opposed to it being there so long as its clearly marked as official between certain dates and de facto (or something better) otherwise." Yes - that seems fair, which is why I had included a link to the article about the flag issue.

"The legal situation was clearly stated by the UK government." No - government policy regarding official government events was described in parliament.

I'd like to see this issue settled amicably as well, of course. I really am trying to push for some consistency throughout Wikipedia. So if I ever appear to be 'heated', in my defence, its likely more for that reason than any particular sense of 'loyalty' to any given flag or political ideology. Of course, I don't disguise the fact that I'm a unionist. But, for me at least, this issue has little or nothing to do with that fact. From the first moment I started editing Wikipedia, I have struggled for consistency, uniformity and sense of structure of style within it. Thanks for your patience Sony. --Mal 20:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:MAR template

Hi Mal, how's things? Is the Marillion WikiProject/template your handiwork? My bot is tagging a list of articles given to me by WikiProject Biography, and I just noticed a couple sail by on the console which are already tagged with your template and a HTML comment saying "replaces WPBiography".

If you're gonna do that - and they'd probably prefer you didn't ;) - you need to ask WPBio first, and let the bot plugin developer know so that he can have the plugin skip those pages so as to avoid double tagging (and that would be me! :P)

It's no big deal, but if you're wondering why some pages got tagged there's your answer. My bot knows to skip WPBeatles and KLF pages when tagging for WPBio, but that's all it knows in that regard. Cheers. --kingboyk 15:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what you're talking about exactly Steve, but its likely to be something I wasn't previously aware of.. probably something I saw and tried to copy - you know me: always trying to help out! :)

I'm sure you've sorted it though. I added the Marillion project due to the fact that a couple of other editors had asked me about it. I thought there had been an interest in it but last time I looked there didn't seem to be a wild pile done to it!

Ditto with both the Belfast and Northern Ireland WikiProjects really.. although a couple of other editors have started to tag and assess now. :)

Hope things are going OK with you, and that you're not getting so swamped with coding for Wikipedia that you're missing out on good oul' Real Life™! ;) --Mal 23:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Heh OK. I didn't exactly sort it, no, as I noticed a little too late. Basically, all it is is that some of your Marillion talk pages will now have {{WPBiography}} on them too. HTML comment suggested you didn't want that.

Not been programming much actually as my old PC broke down and I had to build a new one two... current activity is that I'm standing for the Wikimedia Board, should you wish to vote for me (not open yet) or endorse me!

What about you? What are you up and how's life treating you? --kingboyk 16:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Well I succumbed just now to buying a copy of Nuts! "100 sexiest women on TV!" Might keep me amused for five minutes! Other than that, I've been modding games for a laugh.. oh - do you play many PC games btw? I just got into Rome: Total War, after getting my mum hooked on it!

I might end up building PCs in the USA as part of a little project I've been thinking about. If nothing else it might at least bring in some pocket money after I move there.

I'll take a look at that Wikimedia Board thing and see what that's about. I assume you wouldn't go for it if you didn't think you could handle it. ;) --Mal 20:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

British or English?

Hello again Setanta747!

It seems a debate about the use of nationality and ethnicity has been stirred on the Bernard Manning article talk page (I do beg your pardon!). It is my believe that nationalism is spoiling the integrity of some articles, and have had Union flags and citations removed with no justification. Some are even asserting there is an English nationality!

I would welcome your input on the talk page, as I feel I'm talking to a brick wall. Jhamez84 21:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Northern Ireland

Yes this is an encyclopedia therefore we stick to facts, the Ulster Banner is not the flag of Northern Ireland, therefore it is not used in templates to represent the state today. So in future please use the talk pages before deciding to try and insert the flagicon--padraig3uk 12:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

You don't make it clear which of the articles/templates you have made it your goal to remove the flag from, that you are talking about here. I would suggest, by the way, that before you try to remove the flag icon from any articles or templates in the future, you get consensus first, by discussion on the talk pages.

But I'm happy to inform you that theflag of Northern Ireland is indeed the flag of Northern Ireland. No matter how many messages you leave on my talk page or other talk pages, stating your personal beliefs as fact, won't change the actual fact that the Northern Ireland flag is Northern Ireland's flag - de facto!

With that said, please do NOT leave me any more time wasting messages on my talk page regarding this issue. Thank you for your co-operation. --Mal 08:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Tim Pat Coogan First Minister of Northern Ireland Ulster Movement for Self-Determination The Irish News Ulster Army Council Frank McCoubrey Red Hand Commandos An Phoblacht Glens of Antrim Greater Belfast Northern Ireland Act 1998 Ahoghill Independent Monitoring Commission Bryan Hamilton Sperrins Sean O'Rourke Ulster Loyalist Central Co-ordinating Committee The Sunday Business Post Translink (Northern Ireland)

Cleanup Irish Royal Families History of Belfast The Two Babylons Merge Armalite and ballot box strategy Griesbach hypothesis Irish Americans in New York City Add Sources William Craig Rathcoole (Belfast) Eamonn McCann Wikify Bernadette Devlin McAliskey Portmarnock Spanish Air Force Expand Bank of Ireland Billy Bingham Robert F. Kennedy assassination

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:05, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

re: Re my vandalism report

Hi Mal. It is generally not OK to block vandals if they are not active right now. IP addresses are frequently shared, and the offending contributor may not be the one who is currently the user of the IP address. So we get frustrated, confused people who genuinely want to contribute and don't know why. That's why we prefer to block a vandal to stop them in their tracks, not punish them for their previous misdeeds. Hope that helps - please ask away if it doesn't :) Regards, Riana (talk) 08:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

No, merely that the IP had not been used for vandalism in 2 days. If there was even one unhelpful edit within the last few hours, I would have blocked - I have no sympathy towards vandalism, believe me :) I have to leave now, but if you leave any more questions on my page, I'll try to get back to you ASAP. Cheers, Riana (talk) 10:26, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association

I was taking a look at your copy edits on this article, and saw your "neutrality disputed" tag on the statement akin to a civil war. Frankly, I think that should go entirely. It serves no real purpose, and realy obfuscates the issue more than it explains or makes the matter more clear. Was the conflict in Northern Ireland akin to a civil war, yes, in some ways it was. But, in a great many other ways, it was more complex than a civil war---just as, quite frankly, the "civil war" in Iraq is a great deal more than a civil war, but we'll not get into that. At any rate, my point is, I see no particular reason for those five words to be left in the opening. Cheers! ---Theoldanarchist_Comhrá 17:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree, and I also would add that a choice of describing it as being akin to a civil war is not NPOV.. it might even be weasel wording. I placed the tag there because I wanted to get other opinions on it, rather than just removing it. Cheers. --Mal 17:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Once again, I agree with you. Let's face it, the American Revolution had aspects of a civil war to it, given the conflict between those colonists who remained loyal to England and those who were rebelling. However, were someone to make the same statement as was placed in the NICRA article in the American Revolution article, it might be reasonably assumed that they did so in order to advance a POV. Such a statement would, I think, be quickly removed. Let us hope there is some discussion of the matter in the NICRA article. Did you make a comment about it on the talk page? ---Theoldanarchist_Comhrá 17:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

No. I might have left a comment about it in the article text though, I can't remember now. :) --Mal 18:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

3RR

Didn't you learn how to count or to tell the time when you went to school Orangie? Up the 'RA! Smash Divisions 12:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Andrwsc 21:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I suspect the user doing the reverting is a meatpuppet. As you can see above, I've already been subject to sectarian abuse. --Mal 21:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Given the utterly sectarian nature of your editwarring over the Ulster Banner, that you'd get allegedly abusive sectarian responses frankly does not surprise me in the least; you are both earning them and begging for them (un-disclaimer: I have no opinion at all on the N.I. political issue, only on the abuse of political symbols on Wikipedia). The nonsensicalness of the edit you keep making to Alex Higgins doesn't help either. There is no dispute about the status of the English, Welsh or Scottish flags, and no one is trying to install the Union Jack in that article; the commented-out note you keep putting in there literally makes no sense at all in the context. Consensus has already been reached in numerous places (see my restored HTML comment at that article for the relevant pages) not to use the Ulster Banner where it does not validly apply. I'm sorry that you feel so strongly that the U.B. should be the flag of N.I., but it simply isn't (with the sole exception being that in certain sports it is still used to represent N.I. as the "country" the team or player is playing for officially, but that is emphatically not the same thing as "nationality" for bio infobox purposes, which you either are not understanding or are pretending to not understand, and you've had over two months to figure that out. Go ask WP:BIO if you genuinely doubt this in any way.) The legal/official status of that flag (i.e., it no longer has any at all) is a superbly well-sourced fact at this point. Your edits to that bio article among others have long since crossed the disruptive line. Please stop. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 12:16, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

That does not excuse breaking 3RR. Unless it is obvious vandalism (which it is not) or posted by a banned user (which it also is not), you can and will be blocked for violating it (or indeed, you can be blocked for less then 3 reverts if its determining you're editwarring. It is an absolute limit, not an entitlement. If you do so again, you WILL be blocked. Consider this a final warning. Normally you would be blocked already. SirFozzie 19:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I consider it an excuse, as did the admin who lifted the protection from the template.

If you want to block me then do so. I will complain at your unfair treatment however. Consider that a warning. --Mal 00:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

British in NI

Hey, Mal - the 2006 NIL&T question is "what nationality are you?" This is quite different to what identity people have i.e. there is no option to take out a "Ulster" or "Northern Irish" passport. The 2003[4], 2004[5] and a 1991 CAIN publication[6] have more details on identity rather than nationality. --sony-youth^pléigh 18:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

There is no option to take out a "Scottish", "English" or "Welsh" passport either SonyY. I'm not quite sure what your point is. The words 'nationality' and 'identity' are quite interchangeable, and the article did already discuss how people view themselves as "English", "Scottish" and "Welsh". I filled in the other quarter of the equation. --Mal 18:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I mean the joint nationality set-up in NI is interesting and relevant to the article, but the question isn't quite the same as identity (though overlaps for a good part). Asking someone their nationality (in this case either British, Irish, both or other) is asking what passport they have, not what what identity they have. "Identity" is how the other three quarters of the equation are handled. So for example, while the 2001 census will show that 94.54% of the population of England are British, the figure given is for identity - 48%.

You said that the 2006 survey "omitted the categories" of Northern Irish, Ulster and don't know. It didn't. You simply cannot answer these questions to "What nationality are you?" The answer is written on your passport(s) - you are either British, Irish, both, or not from around here. For the question of identity, the 2004 survey is the most recent - it asks "Which of these best describes the way you think of yourself?" --sony-youth^pléigh 22:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Identity is relevant in the sense that I, for example, consider myself to be both British and Irish - but I am not Irish in the context of being a citizen of the Republic of Ireland. For many, many years by the way, I didn't have a passport. I was still British by nationality at that time though.

The 2006 survey did omit the categories I stated.. you can see that from the differences of course. The question is phrased differently, but for people from Northern Ireland, the question of "national identity" and "nationality" is intertwined - even the exact same thing. Should we briefly mention that in the article perhaps? Or we might want to change the statistics in the article referencing only the 2004 result..? --Mal 23:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Hoping you can help on

Saw your name in the edit history, and it looks like you keep up on things and know what you're doing, so I have to ask.

I noticed that the category page includes the Category:Irish Wikipedians. The self-reference problem was fixed before, but after an hour (maybe more) trying to figure out what caused the problem to re-occur . . . Ack. I must be missing something—possibly something obvious.

If you have a chance, could you fix it, please.

.s

X ile 19:25, 6 July 2007 (UTC) - Talk

And if you have too much time on your hands, maybe you could point me to some explanation as to why a wikilink (non-article) in the edit summary shows in the edit summary preview, but does not save in the heading or TOC. Also do I need to use an external link to link to anything that is not an article in any situation. I haven't picked up a pattern, and it all seems quite arbitrary. Thanks. -X ile 19:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC) - Talk

Hi - I'd love to help, if I can, but which category page are you talking about... the Category:Irish Wikipedians page itself? If you're still online, give me a shout about this and we'll take it from there. --Mal 22:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the category page (Category:Irish Wikipedians) itself refers to itself, which refers to itself, which refers to itself, which refers to itself. You get the idea. I guess a userbox was added that automatically added the category to any page on which it was added. I don't know how to create userboxes, so I was at a loss.

I feel like I'm imposing when I ask a question, but everyone's so nice here (outside of content disputes). I'm starting to get suspicious. Is Wikipedia some kind of cult? Heh. Thanks again.

X ile 00:03, 7 July 2007 (UTC) - Talk

Heh! :) I'll take a look then and see if I can fix it. If I can't fix it, I know a man who can! ;) --Mal 18:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that's it done isn't it..?

With regard to wikilinking to external links, use your best judgement as to how you think the article you're editing looks best. Others will come along afterwards and tidy articles up anyway, if you or I have made any mistakes. There are so many Wiki policies and guidelines, its hard to keep track of them all, so being an editor is a learning process. Other editors will keep you right, and most of them won't be cheeky or sarcastic either! :) --Mal 18:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[De-indent] I just realised that you've inadvertently added this talk page to the Irish Wikipedians category. I'm gonig to make an edit that will fix that, so you can look at the results in the edit history to see how to prevent that from happening. I'll put a comment in the edit history for you too. --Mal 18:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Template talk:Northern Ireland cities

I am not going to allow myself to get dragged into your edit war at the above page. You know fine well that the Ulster Banner is not the Flag of Northern Ireland. The way you keep introducing it to articles as such is imo disrputing wiki and I am sure you are waring editors/admins patience thin on it issue before action is taken. It has created edit wars on countless pages and its not on. There is a discuss open on the articles talk page - why dont you revert it to its original state and gain some sort of concensus or at least engage in a discussion.--Vintagekits 20:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I "know fine well" that the flag of Northern Ireland is Northern Ireland's flag, Vintagekits. I have not "introduced" the flag to articles - in 99% of cases, the flag was already previously there. In any cases where it hasn't been, it is likely to have been introduced for consistency.

As for wearing "editors/admins" patience thin, things were quite well accepted in Wikipedia, bar the occassional edit war, before you arrived, en force, on the scene back near the beginning of the year. Things had been relatively stable until then.

I have engaged in discussion ad nauseum and the only thing that happens is that you repeat yourself in regard to the demise of the Northern Ireland government circa 1973, which is of no relevance to the depiction of an iconic representation of the countries of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales in templates in Wikipedia.

Further to that, it is original research to suggest that Northern Ireland does not have a flag.

Finally, I'm not quite impressed by your attempt to lecture me, or place blame for edit warring on me - especially considering your conduct regarding Wikipedia externally. It rather confirms my suspicions, or the feeling I have had, that you are part of a campaign, and that your only interest in editing Wikipedia is that of political propoganda and causing disruption. I have asked you before not to communicate with me on my talk page, as communicating with you here only ever seems to exacerbate things. This is a reminder. --Mal 20:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

1. Its not {{WP:OR]] to state that the UB is not the FofNI - plenty of sources have been provided to show this. 2. "before you arrived, en force, on the scene back near the beginning of the year" - actually its three weeks until my first birthday. ;) 3, I dont appriciate the parting attack. If you dont discuss issue or build a concensus then you are simply edit warring and I dont want ot be a part of that.--Vintagekits 21:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

.. and yet you are frequently a part of edit warring. I wasn't talking about your duration on Wikipedia by the way, I was talking about the campaign that appears to have started since the beginning of the year.

I have not seen a single source which categorically states that the flag of Northern Ireland is not the flag of Northern Ireland. The clue is actually in the name for goodness sake!

I have reminded you about communicating with me on my talk page, and that I do not feel it is advisable, given your political agenda, that you continue to do so. I'm asking you once again: please stop communicating with me on my talk page. --Mal 21:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Please try and be civil per - WP:CIVIL, if we cant discuss issues we cannot resolve them.--Vintagekits 21:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Which part of "please stop communicating with me on my talk page" is it that you cannot seem to comprehend? Please try to be WP:CIVIL. Thank you. --Mal 21:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Flag cruft

Not to belabor the point, but there is in fact broad consensus at WP:FLAGCRUFT, echoed at the flag template WikiProject and elsewhere, that flags that are no longer official should not be used to represent the entities they once applied to (except in unusual circumstances, such as an article exclusively about that place during the time the flag was valid, etc.) While no one's bothered to plop a guideline tag on WP:FLAGCRUFT yet (last I looked), I'm certain that it would remain there if this happened, as the guideline has been developed over months with many voices heard, and there appears to be precisely zero opposition to the guideline existing (even if a few are still debating some of its particulars.) Anyway, the point being that your statement above that the cessation of the independent N.I. government (ergo the cessation of the U.B. being the N.I. flag officially) is very relevant to whether it should be used as representative of N.I. in WP articles. This has nothing at all to do with Irish/British politics (though I believe your statements elsewhere that there have been very partisan editwars over its particular appearance here and there; they are really entirely separate concerns.) Hope where I am coming from is clearer; I am not one of your Irish Nationalist "enemies" or anything of the sort; rather, my concern is avoiding many such disputes entirely by not using the U.B. as a nationality symbol in WP articles, especially bios - a recommendation that has broad support and a logical basis divorced from particular political concerns. Unless you want to discuss this further, I don't feel the need to ramble on any further about it. I'm sure you must now understand the nature of the issues and how they differ (whether you agree with the WP:FLAGCRUFT take or not being an independent issue; if not you could probably more effectively bring it up over at that talk page, since debating with individuals about it on your talk page or an MfD page isn't likely to have much effect on the direction of the flag-misuse guideline :-) — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, I don't have any "enemies", Irish Republican or otherwise, SMcCandlish - do not make any mistake there. I believe on a certain Wikipedia nomination (for deletion) page I recently left a comment (and placed a vote) on, I made it clear that I didn't consider you to be involved in a campaign, other than the campaign to reduce the number of flags etc.

I also, on that very same page, suggested that the Northern Ireland flag be treated with the same respect and consideration as the English flag, the Scottish flag and the Welsh flag, and gave reasons.

You say that you wish to be "avoiding many such disputes entirely".. "by not using the U.B.". But, in fact, NOT using the flag will obviously attract such disputes. I don't know how you cannot see why that would be the case. Perhaps I should go around removing the flag of Wales from every article in order to prove that point!

Of course Northern Irish people on Wikipedia are few and far between, given the small population. I am but one of a handful of active Northern Irish editors. I was also not aware of any such consensus of which you speak and, again, if such a consensus exists then all the English, Scottish, Cornish, Welsh and many other flags should have been removed with the same fervour as that which inflicts Wikipedia regarding the Northern Irish flag.

Of course, I do understand the issue regarding the overuse of flag icons. While obviously the Internet is very graphically-intensive these days, I don't believe there is any great need to plaster flags over every article, whether they be national flags like the Union Jack, or more 'ethnically'-based or sub-national flags like that of Northern Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales. So I guess on that particular issue I'm roughly in the middle, but leaning towards your own point of view on the issue. I am also a believer in consistency of style within Wikipedia. While that's an almost impossible task, I strive to keep it that way. So, with regard to Alex Higgins for example, if most British snooker players have their sub-national flags included in their infoboxes, then there is no reason whatsoever to not include the subnational flag of Northern Ireland, nor thatt of England, nor Wales, nor Scotland.. from specific articles on snooker players. Likewise, if the articles on the subnations England, Wales and Scotland all include the subnational flags in an infobox template on the article, then there is no good reason to not include a subnational flag on the article for the other subnation, Northern Ireland.. other than WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I hope that gives you more of an insight into the logical way I think about this non-issue. --Mal 22:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Flag

Ive added some questions to the NI discussion page on flags issue.Traditional unionist 22:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. --Mal 22:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked for a period of thirty-six hours for edit-warring on templates and articles related to Northern Ireland. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. -- tariqabjotu 23:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

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

Setanta747 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I can't see that any of the others involved no edit-warring of articles relating to Northern Ireland have been blocked. I don't think your rationale for blocking me alone is sound, and therefore it is an unfair block. This is why I suggest there is a campaign to remove the flag of Northern Ireland from Wikipedia, and I also suggest that those involved in that campaign are purposely disrupting Wikipedia and preventing valuable editors such as myself from contributing sans interruptus. The campaign is a political POV campaign which has seen recruitment occur outside of Wikipedia recently. If I am incorrect in my assumption that I am the only person to have been blocked on this issue, then I offer my apologies to the blocking admin. As an editor, and a person who is interested in consistency and factual editing of this free online encyclopedia, I will continue to place the Northern Ireland flag back into any articles I see it has been needslessly removed from. I suggest Wikipedia address this issue instead of issuing useless bans to individuals who are acting in good faith against what amounts to a cabal. Presumably I can sign this comment..? Perhaps not.

Decline reason:

reason — You admit to edit warring. The fact that others you say are also edit warring have not been blocked is not a reason to unblock you, though it may be a reason to also block them. You are certainly not the only person to be blocked over this whole debacle of Ireland-related articles, nor, I suspect, the last. Your statement above merely shows your intention to carry on edit warring, so I see no reason to unblock at present. Had you shown evidence of a more conciliatory approach, I would have seen a shortening of the block to be in order. I suggest you follow WP:DR for a safer future on wikipedia. Tyrenius 00:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

---

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

Well I'm sorry if you merely wanted me to be conciliatory just to get my account unblocked, but that was not my intention. My intention was to point out the unfairness of singling me out for a block, when it is obvious that I am not the only one who, shall we say, could be accused of edit-warring?

My intention was also to show you, any anyone else who cares to read this, that this issue needs to be addressed because it has resulted in the blocking of useful editors such as myself and wasted many man hours of work.

I didn't admit to edit-warring, other than in the context that I have been blocked for that reason, by the way. I was editing articles in good faith because they quite obviously lacked (in this case) flag icons. I was then thrown against the wall of intransigent political POV - that of a campaign which has been under way since at least the beginning of this year.

So I will 'serve my time', as you deem me to be guilty, and I will continue to be a helpful, resourceful and reasonably prolific editor. I have no intention to "carry on edit-warring" as you put it. However, I fully intend to correct articles throughout Wikipedia - including those inconsistencies I see - once this ridiculous block time has expired. I am sorry that you see my contributions to Wikipedia merely as a continuation of edit-warring. --Mal 01:14, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Flagcruft

I see that padraig is now using WP:Flagcruft as the latest reasoning in the ongoing censorship campaign. I think this article needs some scrutiny, as it seems to have been written mostly by SMcCandlish who although seeming well intentioned seems to be extremely naive surrounding NI. Jonto

A belated thanks for the heads up. --Mal 01:10, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

User:SMcCandlish

The fact that you keep editwarring to install flagicons against already broad and still growing consensus is entirely the problem. It has nothing to do with Ireland or Britain. You see this anti-Ulster Banner political conspiracy here that simply does not exist (or which allegedly exists in the form of a handful of Irish Nationalist editwarriors, but does not include those concerned with the abuse of flag icons, nor does it include editors at Northern Ireland and related articles who don't have a problem with the flag appearing in the article in a historical context and properly identified with date ranges in which it was the flag of N.I., and who do not want to see it misrepresented in the article.) Why can't you see this? This is not about your politics at all, it's about your refusal to do anything but what you personally want to do; that just doesn't work in a cooperative system. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 11:31, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

At the time of your problem, there was no "broad consensus" regarding this issue. Furthermore, your comment about your personal campaign is of no relation to this block and so I am removing your comment from this section of my talk page, to another part just for you. Do not accuse me of editwarring again, unless you include yourself as being a part of that 'war'.

As I have been involved in articles relating to Northern Ireland far longer than you have, I think I'd be in a better position to judge whether or not there is a conspiracy to remove the flag of Northern Ireland. You have (or had, at the time of your edit above) a campaign regarding 'flagcruft' which, as I've told you before, I'm not entirely unsympathetic toward. However, with regard to Northern Ireland, you have been entirely inconsistent. I suspect that you consider Northern Ireland a soft target, due to the comparatively small number of editors here with interest in that area.

Your assertion about what I "personally want to do" can easily be thrown right back at you.

With regard to "why can't you see this", I shall answer twofold. Firstly, why can't you see that you are treating Northern Ireland differently, causing Wikipedia to become inconsistent. Secondly, the flag of Northern Ireland is the flag of Northern Ireland, no matter if the government exists or has ceased to exist... why can't you see this? --Mal 01:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, Chronology vs Timeline

I left you a reply here just about forty thousand years later! --Mal 20:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the tardiness of my response. I'm having browser trouble. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 02:52, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:JackieTurner.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:JackieTurner.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 22:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Vintagekits

Hi, I thought you were the best person to turn to with this... on the FIFA 08 page I think this user is trolling for instances of the Flag of Northern Ireland. I'm trying to avoid a potential edit war, and as you seem to be an expert on all things Northern Ireland here, I'm deferring to you. - MichiganCharms 00:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I find it highly offensive that you refer to me as a political POV pusher of the FIFA 08 talk page and a troll on this. Please strike through those comment or I will refer them to relevent admin. In case you have noticed I have actually add the Ulster Banner to a number of articles over the past few days.--Vintagekits 07:46, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Refer me if you wish, I don't retract saying things I believe to be true. -MichiganCharms 08:09, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Apologies regarding Meditation

You may not remember me, but I was your meditator in the meditation case regarding [Northern Ireland]. I, however, was affected by China's ban on Wikipedia. I apoligize for my sudden inactivity and disappearance from Wikipedia, causing the meditation case to end prematurely.

Again, I apologize.

¿Exir?¡Kamalabadi! 10:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)