User talk:Kittybrewster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please note: I reserve the right to remove and/or edit and/or merge comments on this page. I welcome folks correcting my numerous spelling mistakes whether on talk pages or otherwise.

Archives
Archive 1

Contents 1 Murder vs killing 2 RepublicUK 3 Gillis Baronets 4 Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Astrotrain 5 Archive 6 William Arbuthnot (artillery officer) 7 J R Gillis 8 Minor edits 9 Crest 10 Leathers Arms 11 Baronet AfD 12 Sir Norman Stronge, 8th Baronet 13 More on Scotland 14 USER: VINTAGEKITS 15 RFC FOR VINTAGEKITS 16 Back to the headaches 17 Article naming for Baronets 18 Earls 19 Duff Baronets 20 Summers Baronets 21 A Goodbye 22 hCard microformat in Template:Infobox Biography 23 VKits 24 Lumsden 25 Categories 26 Lionel Phillips 27 Peerage 28 Friedrich Eckstein/Frederick Eckstein 29 Cunningham Baronets 30 Rod Beckstrom etc 31 Credit card 32 Lady Phillips 32.1 Policy 33 Your assistance 34 FYI

[edit] Murder vs killing

In reference to the recent edit war(s) you have been involved in over use of "murder" over "killing" (or words to that effect), please comment on the issue here so that we might come to a conclusion. Thank you. Logoistic 01:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RepublicUK

Final warning issued; if he does it again, to you or anyone else, please let me know and I'll block him to make it stop. If I knew for sure he was a sock - certainly looks like one - I'd block him straight-out, but I can't figure out who he might be. Do you have any idea? He seems to have some particular complaint with you, so I thought you might have a solid guess, at which point we can do a checkuser and look for a long-term solution. | Mr. Darcy talk 16:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll ask C-R. If it happens again, let me know, as it looks to me like RepUK is increasing his disruption as he goes. | Mr. Darcy talk 16:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

He created his User page with "I represent the UK organisation Republic which can be found at www.republic.org.uk ". Does this mean he has come to Wikipedia with an object in mind? Seems like it. David Lauder 20:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

He looks like a sock-puppet to me.--Major Bonkers 22:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Who do you think he could be??????--Vintagekits 22:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Vintage, I prefer that you do not leave comments on my talk page. 'Crucified on a cross' is a tautology. - Kittybrewster 22:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Bonkers that he's an established user, but I don't see anyone with a similar editing pattern, and can't block him just on that whiff of a suspicion. If any of you has a solid guess as to his identity - it's not Vintagekits, I've already examined that possibility due to their similar comments on the open AfD - let me know or, if you're not comfortable doing it openly, just email me. | Mr. Darcy talk 14:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Im flattered, I truly am, I've been here a couple of weeks and you consider me to be an established user. Please don't talk about me behind my back like little school children.RepublicUK 04:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gillis Baronets

It doesn't look like it. The creator, User:Duiek, seems to have edited and created lots of pages concerning this family (including saying that one of them was Vice-Admiral of Scotland, and that one of them is an entrepreneur (Googling suggests the company concerned, W. M. Gulliksen, does actually exist, but doesn't suggest it's notable in any way)). The 2nd Baronet is supposed to have married Anne, daughter of the 4th Earl of Findlater, but my sources say that that nobleman had no daughter of that name, and I can't see any relative of any of the Earls marrying anyone called Gillis. My gut reaction would be that it's a couple of vanity articles concerning a non-notable American family (one of whom is presumably the editor concerned) together with a completely invented illustrious family history. Proteus (Talk) 23:28, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Astrotrain

I noticed you posted in the talk page. The normal procedure is to state your view in the outside view section. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Jance and Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Essjay. The idea is to gain consensus, so individual sections do not have a "disagree" option as with AfD for example. The alternative view is stated separately. Users can then choose to endorse whichever view(s) they choose. Tyrenius 23:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I thought about it and clearly (not for the first time in my life) jumped the wrong way. I have fixed it. - Kittybrewster 23:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Complicated business at times. I removed "disagree" as this is meant to be your statement on Astrotrain (and the relevant situation), not a !vote as such on the opening statement. I hope this is OK. Tyrenius 23:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

As your talk page is getting rather long, I thought you might benefit from an archive. See the box at the top of the page. Click the red link to open the page itself. Just cut and paste unwanted talk into it. (If you don't want the box, then just delete it.) Tyrenius 02:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Learning all the time. - Kittybrewster 13:09, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Lots to learn - there's never and end to it, because as soon as you've mastered something, it gets changed anyway! I might mention it is the norm not to delete or archive active threads, i.e. when users are still commenting or likely to in the immediate future. It can give the — I'm sure in this case mistaken — impression that the user has something to hide. Tyrenius 23:17, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William Arbuthnot (artillery officer)

Vintagekits isn't disrupting this. He's quite entitled to place a nn tag if he wishes, or a prod or take it to AfD, if he thinks any of these things are merited. He is proceeding very prudently with merely the lowest level to start with. This is the normal business of editing, and as long as it is done for sincere reasons, rather than overt and deliberate disruption, there is no problem, even if the person is mistaken. In the lack of evidence to the contrary, we AGF. There has to be a "cut off" point where military and aristocracy don't make the threshold. I am inclined to think this subject does, per commanding a large body of men (in this case a whole branch of the army), so might well be a resounding keep if it went to AfD, but I could be wrong. There are probably more dubious examples, however. Tyrenius 01:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I accept he is entitled to place a nn tag and that this is prudent/ low level. It seems to me strange that there are folks who question notability of a general while contributing to articles for young men who achieved nothing other than (the dubious honour of) getting shot. I have no doubt this article would survive an afd, but what it really needs is not an nn tag (in my opinion) but a "could use expanding" tag. I will work on that when time allows. Meanwhile [note to self] I must stop feeling VK is stalking me. - Kittybrewster 18:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] J R Gillis

(from User talk:Quarl) Thank you. Would you like to tell him? (If he doesn't know already). Dieuk seems remarkably dilligent if he is not J R Gillis. - Kittybrewster 09:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Kittybrewster, I was hoping someone else would pursue it so I didn't have to :) —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-05 08:55Z

Done. - Kittybrewster 18:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minor edits

Please don't label additions to talk pages as minor edits, as some users turn off minor edits on their watchlist. Details of what constitutes a minor edit are at WP:MINOR. Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 01:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crest

You seem to have the details per your post on the French wiki wrt the colours for the crest so I don't quite follow the question. Bit surprised about the colours given as I'm used to seeing sea dogs in vert and or. Alci12 18:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I copied the blazon from Burke's. - Kittybrewster 10:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh I wasn't doubting the accuracy of what you said just an unusual colour Alci12 11:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leathers Arms

Any ideas where I might find the Leathers family arms to add to Frederick Leathers, 1st Viscount Leathers? Weggie 12:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Is the Viscount an armiger? You cannot just attribute Arms to him because the surname is the same. David Lauder 13:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I've no idea to be honest, how do I find out? Weggie 13:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

There is no armigerous family of Leathers in the General Armory of England, Scotland, and Ireland by Messrs., John & John Bernard Burke, 3rd edition, London, 1844. David Lauder 13:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh well. Thanks for your help Weggie 13:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he is armigerous. I will email you the details. - Kittybrewster 14:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Oops. I can't. Please email me. - Kittybrewster 14:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Will do so tonight (just getting the Wiki-email validation thing sorted as I've not switched it on before) Weggie 14:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Baronet AfD

I have just come across a deletion nomination for Sir Keith Arbuthnot, Bt. You may wish to comment (here, my Talk Page, or elsewhere) on my remarks on that. I think the AfD is wrong. David Lauder 13:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sir Norman Stronge, 8th Baronet

I think it's shaped up nicely, so please do initiate a WP:Peer review. It could probably do with more in the family section and some more personal information. Tyrenius 01:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I will have a go. - Kittybrewster 10:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Think we need slightly more on his war service as well - nearly there though Weggie 11:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Medal
At first I thought it might have been his baronet's badge but obviously not if he didn't inherit the title until 1939 and the photo was taken in the '20s. It looks a bit like the Belgian Croix de Guerre which he was awarded, but I'm not sure if that's only worn on the chest (?) It is a bit hard to make out too. Maybe you could direct the question to Wikipedia:WikiProject Orders, Decorations, and Medals. Thanks, Craigy (talk) 21:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More on Scotland

I wondered if you might care to update the style and content of these, or pass onto someone else who might be interested. A lot of text is from the 100 year old Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition. What was then obviously considered the finest writing needs considerable revision to conform to wikipedia policies...

• Allan Ramsay (artist)
• Allan Ramsay (poet)
• William Aikman (painter)

Tyrenius 02:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] USER: VINTAGEKITS

I filed a complaint against User:Vintagekits for his mass spamming and bad faith PRODing. Thanks for rv his abuses but you shouldn't have had to do all that work, and not all those pages need expanding anyway.

I think he deserves to be blocked indefinitely or for a lengthy period for what he did/does/will do. Don't you agree? We both know his history of pro-PIRA slants, etc. We both know he is going to continue doing this sort of thing or perpetrate other sorts of abuses.

Why don't you lodge a serious complaint as well to the Administrators or ArbCom committee??

Pls. respond on my talk page if you care to. Yours, O'Donoghue 01:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

He is now attacking my articles deliberately. See Broun Baronets.David Lauder 23:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFC FOR VINTAGEKITS

You forgot to sign your statement on the RfC for Vintagekits. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kittybrewster/VK_rfc O'Donoghue 13:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have not yet made a statement. - Kittybrewster 19:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I suspect the problem is that nobody knows it's there; it doesn't seem to be linked from anywhere but your user page. If you want to attract outside interest to something, mentioning it on a relevant talk page is often a good idea. If there are at least two people who agree that there's a problem, and the RfC is certified (or you think it will be certified very soon), you should post it to WP:RFC, rather than leaving it in your userspace and hoping somebody notices it. Hope that helps! --ais523 14:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, seems that was O'Donoghue's helpme in your userspace (I misread the history), but I'll leave this here because you might find it relevant. --ais523 14:37, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

If you want the RfC for Vintagekits to proceed you must sign off/endorse under the section called Users certifying the basis for this dispute. Thanks!O'Donoghue 17:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't - yet. Gathering data. - Kittybrewster 17:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

OK- when you do the section is "Requests for comment/User conduct".O'Donoghue 17:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, User:O'Donoghue has tried to file the RfC anyway, and I've fixed it for them per a helpme request (as best as I can without admin tools); I also removed the 'this is a draft' line because the page was linked from RfC and people were ignoring it anyway. (Your user subpage was linked - via an external link - from WP:RFC/USER for a time.) As far as I can tell, it meets the criteria for being open even though you haven't opened it, which is a pretty unusual situation; I'm a bit confused as to do now, so I'm just posting here to let you know what the status quo is so you can make up your own mind. Hope that helps! --ais523 18:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed. Not close to being useful yet. - Kittybrewster 19:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Back to the headaches

Please see my comments in User_talk:Tyrenius#I_was_writing_this_the_other_night_as_I_got_blocked. You can't have it both ways. Either Vintagekits stays off your page, except where unavoidable, and vice versa. Or not. But there's not one rule for him and one for you. The copyright issue can be discussed on an article talk page, if necessary, where other interested editors can also be made aware. Tyrenius 01:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the comments should have been on N Stronge's page. I pasted them there, editing out the sniping. VK has never asked me not to post on his page. I guess he has now! - Kittybrewster 01:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article naming for Baronets

Please folks, centralise this discussion rather than splatting it over a dozen article talk pages. I suggest Category_talk:Baronets. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Earls

I know you are a prolific contributor to articles about Baronets etc, so I ask you for guidance. While doing checking of random articles for referencing, I found a category of Earls: Category:Earldoms which sounded like they were taken from some print or online source, but the first several I looked at had no sources listed, so I tagged thm as "unreferenced" and moved on. Then I found Earl of Holland which cited a web page: This page incorporates information from Leigh Rayment's Peerage Page. . I find it appears to be just someone's webpage. Would you consider it to be a reliable source satisfying WP:ATT ? Wouldn't these titles/persons be in the more standard peerage books? I do not see where he cites to a printed source. Thanks. Edison 21:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes the Earldoms will be in Burke's Peerage, Burke's Extinct Peerage, etc. But I am not aware of any source other than Rayment which seeks to collate them all. He makes mistakes but they are astonishingly rare. It is a source to trust. User:Proteus is an expert on this question. - Kittybrewster 21:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duff Baronets

Agree, I wasn't very happy with it although in all honesty I thought it was difficult to read also before my changes. Please feel free to make the changes you feel are necessary to make the page easier to read. Regards, Tryde 07:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Summers Baronets

Hello again. Summers Baronets needs to be removed from List of extant Baronetcies. Do we have to manually change all the order of precedence numbers in the list or is there a more sophisticated way of doing this. Regards, Tryde 16:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know of a more sophisticated way. - Kittybrewster (talk) 22:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I have corrected the numbering. Tryde 08:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A Goodbye

Just a quick message to say goodbye as I am leaving my Wikipedia account (reasons at my user page). I would also like to say well done for all your wonderful work on Wikipedia. Despite the many hassels you get, notably from User:Vintagekits about the baronets, you always remain calm and continue. I have not got your patience and have had enough of hassels from many people; Im also starting a new 9-5 job this month so won't have the hours I have now. Anway, goodbye and keep up the excellant work. --Berks105 20:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I proberly won't be able to stop myself looking occasionally, I will be worried about the pages I put so much effort into being vandalised! Bye. --Berks105 21:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hCard microformat in Template:Infobox Biography

Hi,

I see that you;re an editor of Template:Infobox Biography. Would you be interested in helping to add the hCard microformat (see also Wikipedia:WikiProject_Microformats) to that? I can advise on the required mark-up, but I'm not familiar with template code editing. Andy Mabbett 11:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] VKits

Whatever became of the request for comment for Vintagekits?--Counter-revolutionary 18:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

It can wait. It is not ready to float. Real life takes priority. - Kittybrewster (talk) 18:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh yes, of course, I just wasn't sure whether it had been launched or not. --Counter-revolutionary 19:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lumsden

I'm afraid I don't know enough to comment on it. It seems sourced, though, and there's nothing in it that instantly jumps out as absurd. I don't think being a former feudal baron is worth mentioning, however. Proteus (Talk) 13:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories

I see no reason why Lords of Parliament shouldn't be included. And Category:Barons in the Peerage of the United Kingdom seems only to be hereditary peers, so life peerage categories (both LPA and AJA) would appear to be necessary. Proteus (Talk) 00:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

LPA and AJA?? - Kittybrewster (talk) 06:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Life Peerages Act 1958 and Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876. I suppose representative peers had better be put in too, since there's not really any other way to categorise that category, but they will all of course be in one of the other categories already. Proteus (Talk) 09:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lionel Phillips

Hi and thanks for the message! Peremptory, terse, discourteous AND arrogant AND a hypocrite. I've had a long life in the world of science and have a holy respect for good logic and reasoned thinking, but I also know that the truly knowledgeable people, in all walks of life, without exception, are patient and sensitive when it comes to sharing their expertise. I have no patience with bullies. Having said that, I would like to have a good working relationship with fellow editors who are truly interested in improving articles and not just putting their stamp of authority on everything. Do let me know if I can help in any way. Paul venter 11:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Great. I have not understood some of the reverting you have done on this article. But together we are all making progress. Do bear in mind WP:NPA. - Kittybrewster (talk) 21:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I also know that the truly knowledgeable people, in all walks of life, without exception, are patient and sensitive when it comes to sharing their expertise. Could Paul Venter provide us with a source for such an amazing statement? Certainly it has not been my experience. David Lauder 15:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peerage

Looking at the worklists (Index · Statistics · Log) I seem to have got some English monarchs tagged, because they were also dukes or what have you. An easy way to get around this (rather than reverting those edits) would be to have the project template make the peerage WikiProject mutually exclusive to Royalty/British Royalty, i.e. if royalty is yes or british royalty is yes the peerage-work-group=yes parameter gets ignored.

Would this be acceptable, or are there articles which are genuinely in the scope of both WikiProject British Royalty and WikiProject Peerage? --kingboyk 14:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

No, the logic is right. They are covered by both projects. :) - Kittybrewster (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up.

My bot has now done all the categories you requested. I trust that's all, but if not you know where to make the request for further categories :) --kingboyk 16:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Friedrich Eckstein/Frederick Eckstein

Hi Kittybrewster, here's another baronet for you - the younger brother of Hermann Eckstein - do you already know about him? . Incidentally, I thought it strange that you labelled Phillips and Wernher as 'Sirs' before their knighthoods had been conferred. Is that normal? If I'm wrong just revert. Cheers Paul venter 17:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

No I didn't; is that Friedrich? . And you are right. But baronetcy not knighthood. - Kittybrewster (talk) 17:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cunningham Baronets

I have added a couple of reasonably notable Cunningham baronets. Let me know what you think. I may try and put some flesh on them when I have more time. Is there anything you have asked me to do anywhere which I have forgotten about? David Lauder 21:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

And here also: Sir Thomas Montgomery-Cuninghame, 8th Baronet. David Lauder 09:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I have created Cunningham Baronets - Kittybrewster (talk) 10:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rod Beckstrom etc

If you are reading this please consider yourself volunteered to clean up and re-write and improve Rod Beckstrom. - Kittybrewster (talk) 09:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Credit card

Funny! Well it amused me anyway.Happy april fools day.Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 18:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lady Phillips

Please do not clutter my talk page with comments when I have specifically requested you not to do so - see below Paul venter 13:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I am happy to discuss here instead.

[edit] Policy

Please note there is a policy relating to image size which should be followed Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Displayed_image_size:

In articles, if you wish to have a photo beside the text, you should generally use the "thumbnail" option available in the "Image markup" (this results in 180 pixels wide display in standard preferences default setting).

There is also a guideline Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Images:

• Specifying the size of a thumb image is not recommended: without specifying a size the width will be what the reader has specified in their user preferences, with a default of 180px (which applies for most readers). However, the image subject or image properties may call for a specific image width in order to enhance the readability and/or layout of an article. Cases where specific image width are considered appropriate include:

• On images with extreme aspect ratios
• When using detailed maps, diagrams or charts
• When a small region of an image is considered relevant, but the image would lose its coherence when cropped to that region

Bear in mind that some users need to configure their systems to display large text. Forced large thumbnails can leave little width for text, making reading difficult.

The current image markup language is:

[[Image:picture.jpg|thumb|right|Insert caption here]]

[edit] Your assistance

I wonder if you could help me at Lamberton, Borders, Scotland a truly clumsy heading. I don't understand how to go about changing it. Ideally it should be Lamberton, Berwickshire, or Lamberton, Scottish Borders. Scotland is unnecessary as it is in the preamble. David Lauder 16:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Use the move tag. - Kittybrewster (talk) 16:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Very many thanks! (That was fast!). Regards, David Lauder 16:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

Per your request.[1] Tyrenius 00:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)