User talk:Guy Hatton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!

Hello Guy Hatton, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Pamri • Talk 13:20, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Moors Murders

Y'know, I was always taught at journalism college, in law lectures, that strangling was a very final act and that death was the only conclusion, hence the change I made. Any compression of the neck area which was not fatal was always an attempt at strangulation, not actual strangulation. Mileage clearly varies, and I've not reversed the change you instigated to the article as I think further debate might be needed, if deemed important enough! I've also noted what the wikipedia page on strangulation says, though I'm not in agreement with it. Maybe it varies depending on the national brand of English used. Anyway, thought I'd drop in and make the point. I'll put it on the Moors Murders talk page too. Regards! Bentley Banana 08:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

It's always been my impression that strangulation could occur without inevitably leading to death, and I think that's probably how most people understand it, but I'm happy to agree to disagree on this. I also checked the Wikipedia article before making the change, and it seemed to me that it was worth attempting consistency. Maybe you're right about regional variations - I hadn't considered that possibility. Guy Hatton 11:09, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NACODS deputies

Hello there - thanks for helping clear up what i wrote - really worked nice.

The info about the deputies being in fear of there lives comes from my next door neighbour and a relative who were deputies at the time, and were seen as "scabs" on occasion. There was a lot of pciketing at Maltby and indeed a huge riot that is not known about too much on the internet. If i can get any documented stuff i will help out, the only knowledge i have is living there during the strike.

Once again - thanks for your help.

No problem. Regarding citations, please be assured that I'm not questioning the truth of what you say - it's just in the nature of an encyclopedia that material should be verifiable from published sources, so I felt duty bound to add that tag in the circumstances (otherwise, it remains 'original research' in Wikipedia terms, which, strictly speaking, isn't allowed). If you do know of any published sources that corroborate the points you make, that would be a great advantage.

Regards, Guy Hatton 16:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello Guy -looking at your edits and contributions to the article, you write very well. I was wondering if you could help me add political weight to this article without being accused of bias?

What most people agree on, with hindsight, is that the miners strike and the tories aims were to destroy the miners, which came true by 1994.Now, i have tried to enter points like this into the article but had them removed. I am just wondering how i can insert this fact into the article without effecting the NPOV. Any ideas? Id, like to start the article with:- "Thatcher, along with her international gang of bastards" just joking, that would be to truthful lol Ukbn2 13:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

The key to avoiding charges of of bias, is as ever, being able to back up your points with citations from reputable published sources. Ideal in this instance would be internal documents from the Thatcher government in which the intention of weakening or destroying the NUM, or the trade union movement in general, is spelled out explicitly. I personally would be very surprised if such documents did not exist, but I think we'll be waiting some time before they're published officially. Maybe, however, some have been 'leaked' at some time? If so, there may well be newspaper reports detailing some or all of their contents. It might also be worth going through newspaper archives looking for reports of speeches by leading members of the government or Tory party officials in which their intentions may have been let slip.

Even so, if there are contradictory reports from other sources, you would have to allow them fair representation in an encyclopedic context - I don't really think there's any way round that.

It may be a little while before I have time to give the article a proper close look, but if I can help, I will endeavour to do so.

Regards Guy Hatton 13:55, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thatcher

Hi Guy, i am trying to edit the Miners strike article and perhaps give it some "grit", not bias, but trying to throw in some background about not just coal, but the culture - PHB soap,slag heaps,kindling, the camaradirie etc.


Also, i feel any thatcher comments, supporting her about the strike and her comments, should be balanced out with comment from perhaps scargill, does anybody in the world actually belive that this woman was right ?Ukbn2 16:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC) Hello again Guy- found some stuff on the Maltby riot:- http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/21/newsid_2527000/2527559.stm

[edit] Mazher Mahmood

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on the Mazher Mahmood article. I have tried to raise the problem, which has been going on since early April, on the admins' incidents board, but it has been ignored: [1] Maybe you would like to comment here?--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 12:18, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Comment duly made. Guy Hatton 17:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Hopefully, it will be taken seriously now.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 18:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tomato Sauce

I beg to differ, I agree that in the article it should be ketchup but I never heard it referred to as ketchup until I moved to the southern part of England. It must be a Northern thing! Zerbey 19:23, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Interesting! Maybe it is more of a Northern usage, then. Guy Hatton 22:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] [bandname] is/are

Re: AMM. (1) I'm not convinced that it's standardized UK usage to treat bandnames as plural; (2) a spotcheck on various UK music sources reveals that AMM is usually singular though occasionally plural (e.g., take a look at the European Free Improvisation site & you'll see "AMM" as singular mostly, though in a quote Rowe uses it in consecutive sentences as singular AND plural!; in Bailey's Improvisation pp 128-131, it's "AMM are" on p.128 but the rest is singular: "AMM hasn't" and "AMM is" on p.130, "AMM is" on p.131). (3) in any case the guy who revised the page did a half-assed job & only changed two instances from singular to plural, leaving several others alone, so it's a mishmash. (4) by reverting, you also deleted a few typo-corrections I made that didn't have anything to do with plurals. ND 03:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guy Hatton

(The following is copied directly from Talk:George_Galloway, documenting accusations made about me by another user, claims made about the content of this page, and my reply.)

Any casual editor dropping by, perhaps not knowing much of Galloway and wondering who is most POV, me or Guy Hatton, should check out Guy's talk page where he can be seen plotting openly on how to dress up socialist campaigns as NPOV, how to counter-attack attempts to thwart it, etc. Thanks Guy! (Guy hastily rushes to his page to edit out the giveaways before too many eyes see them). MarkThomas 21:45, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

See your own talk page and learn something. And no, I'm not editing anything out of my talk page, as what you have written above is gross misrepresentation. Guy Hatton 08:10, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I'd have to go further than that, and label the above accusations as fiction. What I see are admonitions to other editors to abide by WP:V. Hence I think the evidence (for anybody who cares to look) supports me in this matter, and it will be staying right where it is. Were I to remove it, MarkThomas's distortions would be more difficult to refute. Why on earth would I do that to myself? I may occasionally have made my own political position apparent, as has Mark Thomas (he more vehemently than I, it would appear). However, I feel completely justified in asserting that I have NEVER attempted to undermine WP policy, nor have I ever aided or encouraged other users to do so. The accusations levelled at me by this user are, I believe, entirely bogus and should be withdrawn. They are most certainly in violation of WP:CIV, and possibly also WP:NPA.

With that, I am terminating all further engagement with this user. I shall also refrain from editing the Galloway article, as I'm sure it will soon become apparent that, contrary to Mark Thomas's apparent conviction, the article does not rely on my efforts to weed out bad editing. There are many other editors who are doubtless as capable or more capable than me in that respect. Guy Hatton 08:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Since I posted the above, the user in question has made further utterly false accusations against me, particularly one of sock puppetry, on his own talk page. He appears, however, to have agreed to leave the Galloway article alone too (though with considerable bad grace, including incivility to another user). I am prepared to leave the matter there. Guy Hatton 11:28, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

MarkThomas - he's still lurking around gnashing his teeth on the Galloway page. Pitiful to watch really. An obsession with trying to say nasty things about a politician who is already largely discredited in most people's eyes anyway. --SandyDancer 20:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I know - I've been watching the whole sorry affair, but unlike him, I am true to my word. When I say I'll not get involved, I mean it. It looks as though he's now embarqued on a campaign of harrassing the admins which can probably only end in tears ;-) Guy Hatton 23:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fish and Chips

Ok. Looks like good work to me.Bailrigg 10:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warrington bomb attacks

Hi Guy, despite your request to leave the article alone while discussions went on the same editor has reverted it again. I do not want to revert it again, do you want ot have a look.--Vintagekits 19:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Removal of template from Warrington Entry

CouldI ask why you decided to remove the category of "Cheshire, Borough of Warrington" from the article on Warrington? It seems quite reasonable to include it, aliong with all the other templates concerned with the Ceremonial County of Cheshire, and I see it being advantageous to the article as opposed to the list-like entries that are currently there.  DDStretch  (talk) 09:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah! Sorry, I see you've now added it back as I was typing in my previous note to you.  DDStretch  (talk) 09:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
No problem. It simply got deleted temporarily as a result of my reverting previous vandalism, it was always my intention to restore it afterwards. Guy Hatton 09:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! I spent some time drawing it up last night. I noticed the other changes which you've removed as vandalism, but wasn't entirely sure whether they were vandalism or not, so left them for someone else to look at - you as it happens! Thanks.  DDStretch  (talk) 09:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] STW logo

Don't just use comments like "rv nonsense" - can you show us another WP page where a political logo is used like that? Thanks. MarkThomas 08:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/u/y/User_talk%7EGuy_Hatton_a7b4.html"