User talk:Kathryn NicDhàna

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Kathryn NicDhàna is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia when she is less busy with real life.

For the sake of conversational continuity:

If you leave a message for me here, I will respond here.
If I leave a message on your talk page, I will watch your talk page and read your response there.

Tapadh Leibh,
--KPN

P.S. Please respect Wikiquette, which means: assume good faith, be polite, and bear in mind what Wikipedia is not. You may also enjoy Tips for the Angry New User. If you are an admin considering going Rouge, you may appreciate these makeup tips.

Leave a new message.
Please sign your message by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~
  1. July 2005 - July 2006
  2. The Halloween Debacle of 2006
  3. If You Are Here to Talk About Jim Morrison
  4. Other things that happened July - October 2006
  5. November 1 - 20, 2006
  6. CVU, RC Patrol, VP, and other Vandalism-related discussions from late 2006
  7. Stalk Talk - Starwood and Trolls - The Attack of the Sock-Headed Hydra
  8. Other things that happened November 22, 2006 - January 3, 2007
  9. January 3 - February 15, 2007

Contents

[edit] Where to go and what to do

Wikipedia policies
Article standards

Neutral point of view
Attribution
What Wikipedia is not
Biographies of living persons
Working with others

Civility
Consensus
No personal attacks
Resolving disputes

[edit] There is no number two

[edit] Kevin Danaher

Hi Kathryn,

I wrote the stub for Kevin Danaher the folklorist and had finished a complete article when I saw you had expanded it. I'm a newbie to Wikipedia and have just noticed that close relatives are not allowed to work on articles (I'm his son). However I have derived my article entirely from published sources, without any personal reminiscences. Can I collate your work and mine, or should I send you my stuff for you to decide what to include?

Hypnopomp 11:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Fáilte to Wikipedia, Hypno! As someone who has benefited greatly from your father's work, it is an honor to meet you. My condolences on his passing; he will continue to be missed by so many. There are customs that are observed in my family that I did not know were widespread and traditional until I read your father's books. So his work has meant a lot to me personally as well as vocationally.
I suggest you post your version of the article on the article's talk page. Then we (and any others interested in working on the article) can look it over together and decide how best to merge them. I look forward to working with you, and just let me know if you have any questions or concerns, whether about the article or about Wikipedia in general. Slán! ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and sympathy, Kathryn. I've posted the draft article in the talk page, as you suggest. Also I can provide photographs of and by KD. As his executor I control the copyrights so that will not be a problem. Hypnopomp 22:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be great to have some photos with the article! The tool bar at the left has the "upload file" option. Just upload the image and make sure you indicate which licensing you want for it. It's explained pretty well on the page, but if you need any help, just ask. Slán! ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

This is related more to your non-Wikipedia expertise, but do you know correct pronunciations for "Taranis" and "Eochaid Ollathair?" I know "Taranis" should be "Tha-ra-nish," but is the "i" pronounced "eye" or "ee," and on which syllable does the emphasis come?

As for "Eochaid Ollathair," (spelling varies, of course), I believe the second part would be something like "oh-la-heer," but the first? I'm at a loss.

If you could help, I'd appreciate it. I don't have anyone convenient that I can ask who'd be likely to know with any kind of reliability; you're the closest thing to an expert that I "know."

Thanks,

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 22:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey Sept, sorry for the delayed response. I got busy, and then I wanted to double-check with someone who has better Irish, and who can render the pronunciations in IPA. I can generally hazard Ulster Gaeilge pronunciations, as they're not too far off from the Gàidhlig, but I'm still getting up to speed with the IPA.
What we know of Gaulish is largely reconstructed, and pronunciation is open to debate, so your guess with Taranis is probably close enough. I've also heard it pronounced with the hard "T". I'd say the "i" would be either an "ih" or an "ee" sound. There's a YahooGroup for reconstructed Gaulish, I think it's called CelticConLang.
In the Goidelic languages, accent is almost always on the first syllable of words. From Angr, with whom I double-checked this: "Eochaid was something like [ˈeoxɨðʲ] in Old Irish and would be spelled Eochaidh and pronounced [ˈoxiː] in Modern Irish. ... Ollathair in IPA: Old Irish [ˈɔɫ̪ˌaθɨɾʲ], Modern [ˈɔɫ̪ˌahəɾʲ]." These things vary a bit with dialect, but that should cover it :-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 08:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. I'm going to have to go research what the pronunciation symbols mean, now... {grin} *Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 15:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I know, IPA is weird weird weird, but I figured you wanted it for an article, and that's the standard we're moving to on WP. I initially wrote something up in rough phonetics, but realized that with English dialects, those things can wind up being sort of useless. I still need to get more up to speed with IPA myself, but I think it's worth it. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 19:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Butting in: Wasn't Taranis always rendered in Latin or Greek anyway (presumably translated from some Galli-Belgæc dialect)? So if the Romans were transcribing it by sound (presuming that is what they were doing) it would be pronounced with a T not an 'Th'. If the name derives from Proto Indo-European as Grimm suggests, it would definitely be a T and the terminal -is would be pronounced like a -uz. - WeniWidiWiki 20:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Someone from another source told me "T" as well, although I have heard that the "T" was hard but slightly aspirated; not sure how to transcribe that.
*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 20:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment on the missing warnings for removing vandalism warnings

I think there are a lot of puzzled CVU members who don't understand why the warning templates were deleted. Further, I can't seem to find the evidence that there was a consensus to delete them. On the contrary, I see almost unanimous support to keep them. Check out this. I would fully support a reopening of the debate on the topic. -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 21:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly, and would be glad to help re-open the discussion and get the templates put back in. The diff you provided also seems to me to show clear consensus for keeping them. This user has some templates we could consider: User:Sbrools/Sandbox ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 22:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
OK. I'm going to try to find at least a few supporters who should be notified when the topic comes up for debate again. I was thinking that I'd create a side discussion page for organization so that the organization effort doesn't clutter up people's talk pages. More to follow. -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 23:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyeditor's barnstar

Thanks for raising this with me, I have a few thoughts:

  1. I dunno how publicised this proposal has been. I know WP:CANVASS makes it a little difficult to know how best to do this, but I think a neutrally worded note about the barnstar proposal at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) explaining why the barnstar is proposed and why it is different from the "Editor's Barnstar" would be acceptable.
  2. Consensus needed. This has always been a vague area. I think two weeks of discussion usually has to occur and there has to be a strong concensus in favour. 17+ support with negligable oppposition definitely meets that hurdle. I guess its just a question of when the clock starts ticking given the premature close last time. To be safe, give it another 6 days. Particularly concensus is needed as to which version of the award is prefered.
  3. Evrik has no special authority over the awards proposals page much as he seems to imply it. His actions there should be considered the same as any other editor. Anyone can at the end of the debate close the discussion and pronounce on concensus.
  4. I do have a small suggestion- as well as spelling, punctuation and grammar, could fixing Wikilinks also be included. I know its an activity peculiar to this encyclopedia but its usually something I do at the same time as fix the other things (and further distinguishes this award from the "Editor's Barnstar". As I see it this proposed barnstar is about positive improvements that do not change the text, the "Editor's Barnstar" is about removing content in a positive manner.
  5. Image. You're probably tired of producing new versions of this, but there a slightly different format I'd like to see tried out. What I have in mind looks like (2). But the quill and broom are flattened (i.e. the shape they take in (1) ). Then instead of crossing over in the middle of the Barnstar, they do so over it, so that they are in line with the near horizontal line created by the most left and right points. If you can bear to give that a try (and understand what I mean) I'd be grateful.

Hope that helps. I am unhappy with Evrik's behaviour in the matter and intend to look into it further. WjBscribe 10:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Excellent points, thank you! I'm not sure I'm seeing what you mean... ok, keeping the same angle between the quill and broom, but moving them up... how high? and reducing them in size? I'm willing to give it another go but am not sure I'm seeing it. At what spot on the star would the quill and broom cross each other? ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
PS - How about if you propose the additional text about Wikilinks? I agree it's worth including, but would prefer it if you propose it so I don't lose anything in translation. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I'll propose the extra text. Forget my suggested change to the design. I just tried playing with it myself and it doesn't look right. Now to decide which of the 8 options I prefer.... WjBscribe 12:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Evrik has a pathological hatred of new barnstars - he'll oppose them even when to make them a WPA is blatently stupid. The reason he gets away with it is because everyone assumes that someone else will promote or archive the discussion, and that someone is generally him. So, if he doesn't want to create a barnstar, the discussion will just sit there for months while everyone is waiting for someone else to promote, and then be archived for "lack of consensus". You clearly have buckets of support and your listing time has run out twice. Evrik, ultimately, has no binding power over the barnstar process, so if you just promote it yourself he can't actually stop you (as he found out with the LGBT Barnstar, which he and southphilly tried to delist on the basis that 72% support and two weeks was "forced through without a lot of support", which ended humiliatingly in an 85% reaffirmation in four weeks). It's been done before. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 10:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment the percentage cited my be right, but the total number of supporters was less than a dozen. As to the rest what was said ... --evrik (talk) 21:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT WikiProject newsletter

[edit] Making Amends

Copyeditor's Award
This Copyeditor's Award is awarded for excellence in copyediting. --South Philly 15:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if my post last night was angry. --South Philly 15:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your apology. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 08:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Modest Barnstar Awarded

the modest barnstar
the modest barnstar

I hereby award you the modest barnstar, anonymously, as tradition would have it, for your unassuming and modest way of contributing to the project, in many small ways, and some larger ones. The modest barnstar may be displayed anywhere (it goes with anything) or may be removed from your page entirely, out of modesty. Cheers! 67.49.8.228 20:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Why thank you! I am honored, and will blush and mumble "oh geez, thanks, but really, it was the team, i just supported the team." :-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 08:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NAMBLA edit

I have reverted your edit to the Nambla page. This article most definitely falls under the scope of our project, as it is both a part of gay and lesbian history as well as being an organization which causes controversy among gays and lesbians. Thanks, Jeffpw 06:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Uh, Jeff, NAMBLA?! It looked clear to me that folks don't want NAMBLA as part of the LGBT WikiProject. And putting the template on that page results in the unfortunate text: "This article is supported by WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia." I think that's appalling. Having a NAMBLA article on WP is acceptable, but I don't think implying it's an accepted part of LGBT culture is acceptable. Or accurate. Seriously, if folks think it's ok to include NAMBLA I'm leaving the WikiProject. I'm majorly squicked right now. Ugh. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 06:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I know. I'm squicked, too :( NAMBLA has been defunct for years anyway. The argument is, though, that the "man-boy" part of the name throws the org into the remit of LGBT and that in any way, LGBT detractors are going to lump it in there anyway. *sgh* - Alison<talk> 06:36, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I guess it's one thing for detractors to wrongly associate LGBT culture with pedophilia. It's another to put up banners that might imply that we're cool with it. I know experienced Wikipedians won't necessarily see it that way, but this really strikes a nerve for me. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 06:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry you feel that way, Kathryn. But if you read the article, you must see that it is most definitely a part of LGBT history, and therefore falls under the scope of our project. Tagging an article does not mean we support the actions of the organization. Wikiproject Fascism supports the Stormfront (website) article, and I am certain they don't support Stormfront itself. Jewish studies, German studies and Polish studies all support the holocaust. They don't support another Holocaust. See where I am going here? There are controversial articles on Wiki, which various projects maintain without endorsing the content. That way we make sure that standards are adhered to, and that no POV creeps in. I'm sorry of this bothers you, but it is simply Wikipedia policy. Jeffpw 06:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Believe me, I'm old enough to know NAMBLA's history. I used to live in Boston (home of the founders, with whom I was certainly not "friends" but we've met often enough as they were very involved in the community). I know men who, as boys, were molested "mentored" by the NAMBLA guys. I've seen their newsletters and talked to people in the organization. I've been at the meetings where we got to fight about whether they get to march in the parade. This is really emotional for me. I fully support the right to have controversial articles on the 'pedia. I just can't be associated with NAMBLA in any way. If you feel strongly that the template, with that wording, belongs on their page I have to leave the project unless and until that changes. I can understand your viewpoint, and you may even be technically right as far as what the scope of various WikiProjects are. I just can't be part of something that implies the project "supports" pedophilia. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 06:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AWARDS

Take a look.thuglasT|C 06:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal?

I didn't remove Scotland from anything. Book of Lismore, the page I created, I put it in, and removed it. If you are from Scotland, or know some Scottish history, and you think the Scotland history category should be there, then put it in. Scottish mythology is not synonymous with Irish mythology. Scottish mythology should have a section of it's own on the template. It will only confuse the reader, and Wikipedia is all about the reader, and not the editors. And it looks better. Manopingo 00:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

You removed Scotland from the Celtic Mythology template, twice: [1] [2]. And with your edit summary of, "Irish Mythology not to be diluted on WP" you seem to have some sort of agenda here. As I responded in the edit summary, I really don't think covering all varieties of Celtic Mythology "dilutes" Irish Mythology :-) On the Nav. template, the Q-Celtic languages/cultures are in one section, and the P-Celtic in another. The Nav. template is already large, and there simply isn't room in it to cover every related article, nor to give a separate header and section to every Celtic culture. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 00:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I didn't mean diluted in the sense of subject, but in the sense of spreading the articles into one arena, thus confusing the reader. It puzzles me why an editor would do this, it's all getting very woolly. I think Scotland should have it's own section, and Cat Sidhe is Irish too, just in case you didn't know. :-))Manopingo 00:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Well it is considered vandalism to to deliberately put silly original research into articles. Please stop doing this, or you may be considered a structural vandal. Manopingo 01:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Fascinating. While I'm flattered that you think I'm the first person to figure out that Scottish Mythology is part of Celtic Mythology, I must humbly refuse the honor. And I must once again remind you that if you keep removing content from nav templates you are going to get blocked. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 02:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I am afraid my dear that you are in danger of being labeled a vandal. Please refrain from your structured vandalism. If wikipedia is to have any credibility, then you must desist at once. Thank you :-)) Manopingo 13:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok - so I reviewed the changes to the template and cannot see what Kathryn is doing wrong here. She's explained her rationale quite clearly whereas you ... have not. - Alison☺ 16:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Quite clearly, the section of the template was specifically compiled for Irish Mythology, and then a user Calgali, inserted Scottish Mythology into that section. Well, if you know anything about Irish Mythology, and most importantly the history of IM, then the whole insertion is absolutely and blatantly in error. I full know I am correct on this, Scotland deserves a section of it's very own, plus subsections. Nothing less is appropriate for Scottish Mythology. If you are after reading material on the subject, I'll merrily oblige, ;-}} Manopingo 18:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
There's absolutely no need to adopt that tone, thank you. Try to discuss the matter civilly, without patronising phrases like "silly" and "my dear", ok? I also have plenty of reading material, thanks all the same. The template in question, {{Celtic mythology}} is, after all about 'Celtic' mythoology and Scotland would largely fall under that remit. Right now, they're being grouped in ethnic sub-divisions (Goidelic/Brythonic) and that seems entirely appropriate. Furthermore, there's intense cross-pollination between Scottish mythology and Irish, notably around the Ulster Cycle. So what exactly is the problem here? - Alison☺ 18:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Really I should not have answered you on the Kathryn NicDhàna page. My apologies to Kathryn NicDhàna . Have a nice weekend. Manopingo 18:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Kathryn, the Book of Lismore is up and running now. I wasn't sure if the ref should have been for the Book of Dean of Lismore, in Scotland. That's why I removed my own edit. Put back the link, if you think is relevant. And I still believe the template can be improved. Cheers (Mano)86.42.148.197 17:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Ah - hi there!! Thought it might have been you all right ;) - Alison☺ 18:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dev

Im probably getting out of hand myself but Dev is growing increasingly hard to work with and i cant deal with it. You seem to be on good grounds. Do you think you could help mediate this? Im trying to make this work for everyone. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thuglas (talk • contribs).

I also want it to work for everyone, and I think it can, given some time, and assuming people can calm down a bit and keep things in perspective. I think one of the problems is we have a very small group in the WikiProject. So when people start butting heads, there's not enough perspective; there's too much interpersonal history and not enough objectivity. I think it's crucial to get more people involved in the WikiProject, for a start, so we have more eyes on these issues. I am willing to talk to Dev, but honestly, I don't know him (him?) any better than I know you or Evrik or anyone else in the project. I'll see what I can do, but if there's an impasse this may require someone who is completely unconnected to any past disagreements among project members. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 01:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Dev's a she. Just FYI :) - Alison☺ 01:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou thuglasT|C 01:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WPA Coordinator

Personally, I don't care that you don't want me as the coordinator, really. It's a thankless role. What I care more about is the wikiproject being hijacked. Your removal of the coordinator section is disruptive.

Put it up for a vote to those people who were members of the wikiproject (and the braintrust) as of 12:01 am today - and give them a week to vote. I'll abide by the consensus of the group. --evrik (talk) 03:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

A look at the talk page shows there was never even consensus on whether a coordinator was appropriate or desired. It looks to me like folks want it to function collectively, like the rest of Wikipedia. Seriously, I think it's bad form for you to keep putting your name on the page as coordinator when there is no consensus for you to do so, and while serious objections are being made to you taking on that role. You have also done some good work, I'm not denying that, but I really think things will go better for you if you could step back and listen to what people are saying instead of insisting you're the coordinator or that wider participation means the project is being "hijacked". The project desperately needs a broader base of input. I personally think you've taken on a lot and are stressed out. You've been tending to bite people, make abrupt decisions without consensus, and have been displaying WP:OWN issues. I don't think that is good for you or the project. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't place my name as the coordinator, that was done by another user. The serious objections were made after the fact by people who had nothing to do with the project prior to a couple of days ago. I agree that the "project desperately needs a broader base of input," and have said so all along. I had to laugh when you said i've been 'biting people' or making decsions without consensus - as that what both you and Dev920 have been doing. In any case, if you don't like what i've been doing - take it to a vote. You keep make a lot of inaccurate statements and i hope that you start srking some of the falsehods.--evrik (talk) 04:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Multiple editors have removed your name as coordinator and replaced the whole "coordinator" section with text to the effect that the project welcomes new members, who should feel free to sign up. As long as you keep reverting those edits, and removing the text that says new members are welcome, ill will is going to continue to spiral around the project. You are seriously driving people away, trying to WP:OWN the project, then complaining when you wind up with a huge workload, then complaining that your work isn't appreciated. Not good. Also, please discuss changes to the page *on the talk page* not on the page of one or two project members. I seriously think you need to make a better effort at understanding this whole collective/consensus thing. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 04:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please don't Vandalise

If I find you are shadowing me, and randomly reverting my edits on WP again, and for no apparent reason, you will leave me with no option but to report you to ADMIN for vandalism. Any edits I make are good faith edits and I'll stand by all of them. This will be your final warning. Thank you.Manopingo 20:44, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Fascinating as ever. Please, feel free to report me "to ADMIN" for reverting some of your more bizarre edits. However, you might want to be aware that some of the people reverting you *are* admins :-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 01:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
They took you up on this. Jkelly 02:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sean Ciall notability

Latha math dhuibh!

You flagged the "notability" of an article I originally wrote on Sean Ciall. I am very new to the Wikipedia thing, I have no idea whether it's "notable" or not. I found an empty link to it from a page called "Pagan Traditions" or some such, and the page asked for someone to expand the article, so I did, to the best of my ability. Some others added to it.

You asked how many people were involved, I honestly don't know. In the Pacific Northwest (specifically Washington state and British Columbia) there are about 100, and there are (based on emails and other things I've received over the years) other communities around North America, Australia and Europe. I don't know how many communities there are, or how many individuals are in those communities.

Anyway, hope this helps clarify! I'm hardly an expert on this, I just happened to be the first person to write it down for Wikipedia. Hopefully others more knowledgeable than myself will pick up the ball from here.

Tapadh leibh,

206.124.152.91 22:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)"Maraiche" (Robert Reeder)

The way the notability thing works is through verifiability. In order for the article to be on Wikipedia, there need to be third-party, verifiable sources that establish notability. So, are there any mentions of the group in books or periodicals? Websites are sometimes usable, if they are third-party (written by someone outside of the group or tradition). The website of the group itself can be included for further information, and to establish non-controversial information about the group (like, the fact they exist and define themselves in a certain way), but the group's own website, in and of itself, does not establish notability, as anyone can create a website. Hope this helps! Slàinte Mhath! ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My Proposal.

I'm dropping my proposal; Sarah raised some points that I hadn't actually thought of. I want to thank you for participating in the discussion, and for your edits to the proposal itself. Acalamari 03:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Here is my new proposal: User:Acalamari/IWN. As you were interested in my last one, I thought you'd might like to know about this one. Acalamari 20:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry it didn't work out. *sigh* - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 05:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Yes you get yet another award

I almost posted this to your user page, but just as I was clicking, saw the caveat, so here you go, I would be honored if you would display this on your user page with the rest.... (just throw it on the pile of other ones, lol)

The Wikihalo Award The Wikihalo Award The Wikihalo Award I was going to give you a quick thank-you for your contribution to Reichstag Climbing, but then got sucked in to reading your other edits, so I hereby award you The Wikihalo award for your overall coolness and humor! Thank you for being YOU! - Sue Rangell 03:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[citation needed] This award was introduced by The Neokidon 21 January 2006.

I thought about reverting this as vandalism, just because :-D

Thank you. For the illegal award and all you've done to make me laugh today. I am honoured. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 05:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

You have inspired me to create this. The illegal version of the WikiHalo:

Image What to type Description
The Outlaw Award {{subst:The Outlaw Halo|message ~~~~}} The Outlaw Halo Award

The Outlaw Halo Award is given for whatever reason you may have, to whomever you feel like.

This award may also be given to those who Ignore All Rules in an audacious way that protects the 'pedia.

It was introduced by Kathryn NicDhàna, illegally, on March 15, 2007, after Sue Rangell [citation needed] Climbed the Reichstag to present her with a Wikihalo award, illegally, without even asking anyone to vote on it.
  • Absolutely fantastic! w00t! - Alison☺ 06:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
    • cackle cackle. - kpn

[edit] St Patrick's Day

Thanks for your sensible comments on St Patrick's Day. More and more of us are getting worried about the alcohol-fuelled debauchery that's going on. While our political leaders fly to all corners of the globe, I'll be staying here, going to church (CofI, as it happens), and enjoying a Guinness at lunch. After that I'll probably wander into town to see the Parade. Let's hope we have a better day than last year!

All good wishes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bill Tegner (talk • contribs) 09:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for your kind comments, Bill. Yes, I usually stay home on St. Patrick's to avoid the drunken louts. For the first time in years I'm considering going out this year, only because there's going to be some good music on (depending if we can get tickets, after procrastinating). Slán, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 22:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Kathryn, I'll raise my glass to you and Alison tomorrow. We're spoilt for choice in the afternoon: the races, or the parade, or planting first early potatoes. Actually I'm getting a bit of stick from an American called "IrishGuy". Possibly my abrasive style hasn't helped, but I think we've patched it up now. Bill Tegner 08:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talking to myself

I must be in an unusually good mood tonight. I just left a welcome message for a poop vandal. Should I be applauded, or pitied? - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 05:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Help! I'm conflicted :) - Alison☺ 05:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I suppose I could be applauded with pity, or patted on the head and told I'm pitiful. Actually, I thought of you, being kind to the troll :-) That's it, it's your fault! - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 05:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I'm too busy pitying myself for going through new pages and slapping speedy deletes on many of them. So applause is in order from me. Can you hear it? --Pigmandialogue 05:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
"Hip, hip, rah, rah, rah, tiger, tiger, tiger, siss, siss, siss, boom, boom, boom, bah" - to both of you! - Alison☺ 06:03, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Oh, you are so overworked, Piggie, it's so sad and pitiful. I'll really pity you when you stay up three hours past your bedtime just so you can handhold yet another vandal through through his grief over having his autobio deleted. Oh, thought I didn't know about that, did you? - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 06:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Oh, Ali, that's just the cheering up I need. It reminds me of an MC5 song. And one of the cheers in the article is from a college not too far away. --Pigmandialogue 06:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
And thanks for cheering me up! Nothing says 1960s quite like this. Oh the horror!! - Alison☺ 06:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Yah, yah - blame me, whydontcha. *sob* ;) - Alison☺ 05:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I blame you for corrupting us all into being nicer. It's terrible. I haven't yelled at anyone today. Yet. :-) - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 06:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Oh hey, it's early days yet. I'm such the sweety little angel, aren't I? (* evil grin *) - Alison☺ 06:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Oh and by the way - thank you for your kind comments over you-know-where. I've kinda kept away from there for the moment as I'm still processing that. But thank you for what you said. I really appreciate it. - Alison☺ 06:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hurrah!

I like :-) As they say in uk.rec.sheds: H!TFD! Guy (Help!) 22:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Wheeeeee! Hands in the air! Whoops! :-) - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LOL

No problem :-). I think I pinched the idea from Essjay's userpage actually... Though his had links to more important things. WjBscribe 23:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I look forward to customizing it further. *rubs hands together conspiratorially* - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:UW future?

Hi Kathryn,

Sorry for the blatant spam, but you have yourself down as interested at WikiProject user warnings WP:UW. There is a discussion on going here that might be of interest to you about the future of this project. There are two strawpolls on the talk pages and the second one is about the future of the WP:UW project. Now we have the end in sight we are looking at wrapping up the project and merging it with Template messages/User talk namespace WP:UTM and creating a one stop shop for all userspace template issue. As you have yourself down as interested in this project we thought you may have some input on this issue, and would like you to visit the discussion and give any thoughts you may have on the matter. Cheers Khukri 10:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll check it out, thanks Khukri! - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My Talk Page

Hi there. Just to let you know, 58.10.167.213 slightly vandalized my talk page. He wrote "anyone who consideres Reagan to be a hero should be shot and pissed on." I know it's small, but does that count for anything, and can I report him? Happyme22 23:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that definitely violates WP:CIVIL. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 00:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Blocked. 48 hrs. If he causes problems when he returns, let me know. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 00:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Starwood

The above-named arbitration case has closed and the decision may be found at the link above. Rosencomet is cautioned to avoid aggressive editing of articles when there is a question of conflict of interest. If edit warring or other conflict arises, it may be best to limit editing to talk pages. This notice is given by a clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. Newyorkbrad 17:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 13 26 March 2007 About the Signpost
From the editor: Tardiness, volunteers, RSS
Patrick and Wool resign in office shakeup WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
News and notes: Board resolutions, milestones Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Deletes

hi Kathryn,

i just noticed that twice:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Samhain&diff=86782886&oldid=86663344

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wheel_of_the_Year&diff=93445294&oldid=92695591

you've removed external links to essays written by Mike Nichols.


your first deletion was accompanied by this explanation: "While containing some interesting folklore, link also has inaccuracies, esp. concerning Gaelic culture and tradition."

what are the inaccuracies?


your second deletion was accompanied by this explanation: "prob. copyvio (wheel graphic on geocities site)"

so are you suggesting that the graphic on Mike's site is a copyright violation? do you have proof? and if it is, does linking to his site violate any wikipedia policies?


peace,

-- Besonen 23:58, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Besonen, The diffs you [initially] provided go to the same edit, so I can only respond to that one. The Mike Nichols site has a lot of ads, and seems to mostly focus on promoting his book, which is frowned upon in the WP:EL external link guidelines. IIRC, I think that graphic is from the Erica Jong book, Witches. I don't have the book at hand, so I can't be sure, but I know I've seen it published elsewhere before. Unless he got permission, yes, that would make use of the graphic on his website a copyright violation. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
I see you've changed one of the diffs in your message above.[3]In the future, if you could use edit summaries, and note any changes to your post in the discussion, it will help readers keep track of changes :-) As to Nichols's Samhain article, I'd say it has a mixture of good, verifiable info (for those who already know what sources to check) along with some speculations and a few inaccuracies. The problem is that, without any citations, the reader doesn't know which content in his essays can be sourced and which are his personal interpretations. Given that, even if there weren't the possible copyvio on the main page of his site and advertising concerns, I don't think the articles I looked at are appropriate for an encyclopedic reference. Slàn, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../k/a/t/User_talk%7EKathryn_NicDh%C3%A0na_4e24.html"