User talk:Mais oui

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive
Archives
  1. Archive 1
  2. Archive 2
  3. Archive 3
  4. Archive 4
  5. Archive 5
  6. Archive 6
  7. Archive 7
  8. Archive 8
  9. Archive 9
  10. Archive 10

Contents

[edit] Bioproject

I see what you're doing in the bio project. Should we use the Medieval Scotland project page to list and organize characters related to medieval Scotland in order of importance? BTW, you might like to know of the existence of Template:Scotland-hist-stub Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, started it off: Wikipedia:WikiProject Medieval Scotland/BioProject. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion on CFD

Hi Mais, thanks for the reminder. I saw the nomination had beeen withdrawn last week so didn't do anything. I've now commented and think this is a good example where dual categorisation makes sense, and is also a good compromise. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I'll take the reference to a "heavyweight" Wikipedian as a compliment, not a reference to my sadly expanding waistline :-), although I have never really regarded myself in such lofty terms around here. We all go about our business doing what we do for the best of the project, but thanks anyway. As for numpties and daft brushes, well from what I've seen that's way off the mark. "Stubborn bugger" might be closer, but the dual cat agreement you struck with BrownHairedGirl was an excellent compromise IMO, and may properly blow that particular description out of the water now. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I tried to read the discussion but, to be honest, I think any vote of mine would be based on a rushed analysis of the situation and I'd rather not vote on something so important without clearly having an understanding of the issue , and an orientation towards one of the "sides." Sorry. Nach0king 18:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Long term abuse#Banned User:Irate

I feel your comments here were disingenuous to the historic counties cause. Far from promoting our "agenda", all we seek is for Wikipedia to reflect a NPOV that aknowledges the reality of the historic counties as separate entities from local government, as stated by Her Majesty's Government and "County Councils" themselves on several occasions. As a Scot, why do you have any interest in county boundaries south of the border anyway? In Scotland I believe you have the fortunate situation, as in Northern Ireland, whereby Counties and local government divisions are widely regarded as separate entities. How would you feel if people tried to tell you that "Scottish Borders" was a county? Yorkshire Phoenix (talk • contribs) 08:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

I'm trying to stay out of the issue at the moment. I note this is the section of policy that is relevant in this case : "views that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented except in articles devoted to those views" - for example, we wouldn't mention the fact that some people believe dinosaur bones were created by god in 4000 BC on every article about a dinosaur fossil. Articles about geography should be about geography: geographic revisionism movements can be perfectly well covered in articles about geographic revisionism movements.

Have you seen Template:Yorkshire and Template:Lancashire? Morwen - Talk 09:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I think that'd be original research ;) It is a form of historical revisionism though, as they have come along after the fact and retroactively invented new entities : everyone back in 1889 was perfectly clear that the County of London was a proper, first-class county : contemporary sources show this quite well.
The term administrative county appears to have only invented as a way of saying for example "administrative county of Lancaster": "Lancashire excluding all the county boroughs", contrasting with the term "county of Lancaster" which meant "Lancashire including all the county boroughs, including the southern part of Warrington and suchforth". In Scotland, where this wasn't needed, the terminology wasn't adopted.
Later, in the 1960s or 1970s, groups were set up by people resenting the Local Government Act 1972 etc, reacting against reform in their area, and therefore promoting the idea of "traditional counties", which they soon found had been tampered with over the preceding years. So they then did research and synthesised, then, a unified set of "traditional" counties with an arbritrary cut-off point differing on whom you speak to. I'd be very surprised if the idea of a still-existing set of N traditional counties, ignoring any boundary changes since the 19th century, predates 1965 (can we find any statements that "Caversham is really in Oxfordshire" before then, for example?) And of course governments were giving statements on the issue, once it had arisen: it's a quick way to shut people up: how can legislation affect the existence of a supposed set of "traditional counties" when the idea of "traditional counties" was invented in the 1960s/1970s by some activists? The statements, when closely examined, are all very carefully worded, but almost non-sequiturs once you realise this.
Of course none of this is documented (for entirely sensible reasons: the youth of the movement would rather undermine their argument of continuity) Morwen - Talk 10:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RSPCA reversion 25th June - response please

Hello again - I find it perturbing that you have not replied to my messages. I have posted another message on Talk:Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. I would appreciate a response, either on that page or on my own talk page User talk:Ballista. Thanks - Ballista 09:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for rapid response. See [[1]] and look at your 25th June edit. I am asking why such a total reversion occurred, without discussion. Previous messages can be found in your User talk:Mais oui!/Archive8, headed 'reversion' (item No 28). - Ballista 10:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
OK thanks - please go to the RSPCA discussion page again, to see some references, although I didn't consider them necessary at the time, as the potential for conflict of interest, in each case, was painfully clear without. - Ballista 10:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC) PS sorry, obviously omitted to hit 'save page' button & I lost them, in my haste to respond to new message. I'll go back and rework it. Please allow 5 mins - Ballista 10:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wekepedians

Just FYI:

You'd be best to stay well clear, just leave Mallimak to continue digging their own hole. /wangi 08:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Biography WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of biographies.

A few features that you might find helpful:

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

  • Starting some new articles? Our article structure tips outlines some things to include.
  • Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every biography article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! plange 15:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ouch

This should probably be redacted. Even if you're 100% correct, the tone is just wrong, and doesn't make you look too good. As you don't know me from a bar of soap, I will take it not amiss if you ignore this unasked for advice. - brenneman {L} 08:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

redact = "frame: formulate in a particular style or language; "I wouldn't put it that way"; "She cast her request in very polite language".
On a scale of 1 to 10, my diplomacy skills are about 2. I am very, very pissed off, and quite frankly I have not got the skills to say what I want to say in flowery language. Given this, I have just deleted the whole damn thing. If she is ever going to apologise, then she will do it anyway, without any flowery request for one from me. --Mais oui! 08:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, there is something to be said for knowing when to just erase something you've said. I've only very recently progressed from that skill to knowing when not to say it in the first place. - brenneman {L} 08:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
You are clearly higher up The Ten Bhumi than my good self. I may, one day, reach that state of blissful being where I can just keep my mouth shut. Don't hold your breath. --Mais oui! 08:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Chomp !!
Chomp !!

This might keep you from saying the wrong thing at the wrong time :-) BTW, I removed you from Category:British female MPs and commented on the whole shebang. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 09:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Chomp, chomp, thanks for the cookie, although it will destroy my lovely figure. Wow, for a few hours there I had managed to both switch gender and get elected to the Westminster parliament. How thrilling. --Mais oui! 08:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Irate

There is no way in the world that User:Irate should be unblocked. He was banned permanently by Jimbo Wales himself, for his bad attitude and his refusal to follow the rules. This was nothing to do with his edits to county articles: it happened before he ever went near them. Read this for to be enlightened (this was one of his sockpuppets). --RFBailey 08:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Mmmm... OK. I did not know the back-story. It was just a suggestion, but clearly not a very good one. --Mais oui! 08:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Wallace

Oh, sorry for disrupting this. I just edited the way I felt was right. I won't remove it then, although I don't see why Henry II should go, as I already cut the list. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, sorry again. I don't Cromwell should be there either. Look how many English rulers are already there. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
When it comes to political leaders, obviously English leaders will top because England has always been stronger and more able to project power and influence on a wider stage. I'm trying to think of a candidate, but it's tough; maybe James I of England? Sorry, that's the best I can do ATM; I'll give it a thought. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 13:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
What about Columba? Founder of Iona (light of western Europe), converter of the northern Picts, true apostle of Scotland, etc? If we got the Scottish and Irish users behind him, then Columba could be possible. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 09:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd rather see less euroamerocentrism, i.e. more variety on the list. Where are Chandragupta Maurya, the First Emperor, the Hongwu Emperor and Suleiman the Magnificent I ask myself ? The usual pathetic effort I'm sorry to say. I'm off to be bold ! Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Stupid categorisation ! Well, Hongwu I need to add. Bastards ! Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

In 20 years time the boot will be on the other foot, so we may as well get used to a greater emphasis on Asian figures. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biography Newsletter August 2006

The August 2006 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. plange 01:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An automated message from Werdnabot

Hi there, I tried to archive your user talk page, but it seems that you have an error in your Werdnabot directive that prevented me from correctly archiving your User talk page. Please review this error, or contact Werdna648 for assistance. Werdnabot (DNBF)/T\C 20:02, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Scotland

I'd be up for that. --Guinnog 20:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colorado Springs Cricket Club

Thanks for creating this stub.

I'm an active member of this club and would be happy to fill in the details.

Abhay Natu

[edit] Scotland

Eh, I woke up half an hour ago to a glowing article about How Wonderful, The Fringe Is Back!, so I'm just being cranky and reactionary ;-) Feel free to revert my changes, I won't fight over them; just a gut feeling stylistically that it didn't improve anything. Shimgray | talk | 13:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reference for Allan Wilson (MSP)

I put the reference you ask for on my talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Allan_Wilson_MSP.

All the gory details are there, (I tend to be a bit "wordy" at times, sorry about that)

After having a look at that which should verify the "football" issue, can we say, simply;

He is married, has two sons, and lives in Kilbirnie. In his free time he is a keen footballer and was appointed chairman of the Kilbirnie Community Football Club committee by the Scottish Football Association.

We would be quite happy with that and could move on to adding "meat" to the article (should we dare).

On that note, see you have added some links, that is great. There is one more that can be added to complete the linking process. (sorry, can't do it myself, rules you know, rules rules rules, ba humbug)

On the line In October 2004 he was appointed Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning. There is a link to an article for "Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deputy_Minister_for_Enterprise_and_Lifelong_Learning

By the way, on a scale of 1 to 10, my diplomacy skill is about 1, welcome to the club. I get pissed off as well though not at you. It is comforting to know I am not alone. I like your style. (fancy a job in the Parliament?)

Allan Wilson MSP 14:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] University of Edinburgh

Why have you restored the massive duplication of the history section?– Smyth\talk 16:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

And what in the manual of style mandates that awkward first sentence for the alumni article? – Smyth\talk 16:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

The first time the article mentions the title, put it in bold using three apostrophes — '''article title''' produces article title. For example: "This Manual of Style is a style guide."

As a general rule, do not put links in
  • the bold reiteration of the title in the article's lead sentence or
  • any section title.
    In future, please read the document referred to before queying it. That section is right at the beginning, so you could have found it easily yourself. --Mais oui! 16:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

    I apologise, I had looked at Wikipedia:Lead section, which is something of a duplicate. However, I still think "avoid banality" is the most important rule in that section. The repeated text looks ridiculous and unprofessional. – Smyth\talk 18:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC) Please respond. – Smyth\talk 08:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] RE: Sorry

    I wouldn't consider myself a newbie as such (4000+ edits), I've just never nominated anything for deletion before (least of all a category). No hard feelings though. -- Steel 17:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Re:inventions

    I doubt Scotland's inventions do modern Scotland any good. Being ruled by another country kinda prevents that. Anyways, yeah, I'll try and fix the history section. There are great images on the Picts on wiki now, may wanna use the Hilton of Cadboll Stone image. What d'ya think? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 19:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

    Hey they do it for me too. :) BTW, I'm preparing an article on David I at User:Calgacus/David_I.. It should be clean and ready in a few days. Hope to get it to FA stage in time for 1.0. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Non notable club

    What do you reckon about the aricle 130th Glasgow Company, The Boys' Brigade? Deletion material? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

    Agree. I bunged up the {{db-club}} template. --Mais oui! 12:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] MPs by Parliament

    I have made a suggestion for how to categorise MPs by Parliament: see Category talk:British_MPs#MPs_by_Parliament, and would welcome your comments. --BrownHairedGirl 21:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Welsh

    Thanks for the (minor) barnstar! I have to say, the Wales vs Welsh people issue is a tricky one. The line between ethnicity and nationality is sometimes quite confusing. My rule of thumb is that Wales is the correct destination, unless particular reference is being made to someone's ethnic background. Are you familiar with WP:DPL? Perhaps you could bring up your concerns there, I'd certainly support you. Soo 10:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Storer Clouston

    Weirdly, it looks as if I changed some of your categorisation in my last edit, but I didn't! I will try to fix it and hope you won't need to tidy up after me. I can't understand what happened. --HJMG 16:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

    Have got cats back to the way you left them now. (I just don't like it when I click 'save page' and unpredictable stuff happens.) --HJMG 16:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
    Cumberland/Cumbernauld!! No comment - or I'll say something cynical. --HJMG 17:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Vandal

    The user "Yorkshire Phoenix" is going round articles, changing home countries to just UK and you only have to look at their user page to see they are here to push their own POV. What can be done about someone like this?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yorkshire_Phoenix_%28194.203.110.127%29—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.207.205.85 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 10 August 2006.

    [edit] East Riding of Yorkshire

    Hi. Can you please explain your reversion here? I put a lot of hard work into for example researching for example the geology of the area and its coastline and don't understand how "WP:NPA; Yorkshire is in England" is supposed to explain such a reversion. Where am I have supposed to made personal attacks? Morwen - Talk 12:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

    Well, if it was by Irate then the edit did indeed need reverting because he is hard-banned. The edit comment was entirely inappropriate, of course. I've not really looked into the start of this. I never got back to you about your message regarding Irate, but he you'd do well to wash your hands of him: he is not going to be a useful ally. Morwen - Talk 12:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
    Oh, and your description of the change from "England" -> "United Kingdom" as vandalism is no more acceptable than his description of your change the other way as vandalism. It's a perfectly legitimate Content_dispute and nobody is vandalising the article. Morwen - Talk 12:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Thanks for help on British

    Thanks for your recent edits on British. That page was not fun to clean up, and I really liked the clarifications you made there. Keep up the good wiki-work! - grubber 17:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Re:Traditional

    Because it's clear that some of the first monarchs there were actually Kings of the Picts, rather than Kings of Scots. "Late Pictland" and "early Scotland" were essentially the same kingdoms. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

    No, the list as a whole is "traditional". The alternative is to get rid of the distinction between "Scottish" and "Pictish" monarchs. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 22:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Orphan Aberdeenshire logo

    Hi, I noticed you tagged Image:Gen aberdeenshire logo.gif as not orphan, pointing to Aberdeenshire, but as far as I can see, the image is not being used in that article (only a .png version of it is used)...? --Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 10:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Vandal at it again

    I see this idiot, is still trying to get rid of any references to England:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brampton&action=history

    Can't you get banned for reverting more than 3 times within a 24 hour period?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.207.20.156 (talk • contribs) 12:00, 11 August 2006.

    I attempted a compromise after your first revert and view your subsequent reverts away from the recognised NUTS 1 subdivisions as vandalism, therefore WP:3RR does not apply. Perhaps if you registered you could try following the rules yourself? Or are you permanently banned? Yorkshire Phoenix (talk) 11:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Mallimak warnings

    reference

    I'd just keep an eye on it... If the IP accounts are used to make plainly unconstrutive and disruptive edits then they should be suitably warned, perhaps leading to a ban if the activity continues. If the user account(s) and IP accounts are used in tandem to increase support for a given viewpoint or evaid 3RR then you've got a case for a checkuser. Thanks/wangi 12:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

    Just another thing - put the edits on the IP user pages themself, not on the (suspected) user's page - if that IP makes repeated vadalism it will be blocked. Yeah? /wangi 00:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
    Fairy nuff. But as he changes IP address every evening, it does seem a bit long drawn out. --Mais oui! 06:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
    I've removed those warnings from Mallimak's talk page. Thanks/wangi 10:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] UK on infoboxes

    What is the motivation for the reverts to adding UK, with no explanation other than "rv"? Mrsteviec 13:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

    Ah I see. You should have simply changed it to something more suitable rather than removing it all together. Mrsteviec 18:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
    If unsure I'd suggest discussing it on the relevant template talk page. Mrsteviec 18:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
    Hehe. I thought that as I typed it. :) However, the Irish situation is more complex and there is some contention that Northern Ireland is not a "country" within the UK whereas there is no such contention with England, Wales and Scotland. Mrsteviec 19:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Sorry..

    Oops! Sorry I put the wrong header. However Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Normalmouth which you requested does require some additional info. --Srikeit (Talk | Email) 08:26, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Your edits to User talk:Mallimak

    Is there any way you two could bury the hatchet? It pains me to see two good editors at each other's throats all the time. --Guinnog 08:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

    I know what you mean. I find his POV-pushing wearing too. I only mean that he is not a simplistic vandal, and does seem to have knowledge of the subjects he writes about. I do sympathise with you; I just wish that we could turn his energies into more productive directions. --Guinnog 08:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Portal:Orkney deletion

    Why did you contact me about the Orkney portal? --bdude Talk 09:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

    -- OK, thanks bdude Talk 09:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

    • Anti-Orkney attacks on my fellow Orcadians will not advance your causes on Wikipedia I may add. 217.204.65.210 13:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Sorry

    I figured signatures tell time anyway. ...And Beyond! 17:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] UK Geography Terminology

    Is it acceptable for Yorkshire Phoenix to be implementing the "NUTS1" category system they suggested, despite no consensus having been met yet? Summertimerolls 16:21, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

    It's more acceptable than the attempts of others to impose "home nation" only geography. NUTS1 are real objective subdivisions of the United Kingdom (Scotland is a NUTS1 subdivision), and the United Kingdom is a political reality, unlike the agenda-driven fantasy of those who believe "England" is an international state. Yorkshire Phoenix (talk) 08:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] CFD for MPs by Parliament

    see CFD for category:MPs of the United Kingdom House of Commons, by Parliament and subcategories. Your comments would be welcome. --BrownHairedGirl 17:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Years in England on football template creating large numbers of red categories

    Are you planning to actually create all the categories you have red linked by adding that entry to Template:English football seasons? I hope so. The addition has created a large number of red (worthless) category links. Someone will eventually need to create all those categories, or remove the item from the template. Looking through, it looks like there are over 100 categories that need to be created to accomodate this template link. - TexasAndroid 17:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] By country categories

    Without wanting to sound like a stuck record I thought I'd just let you know that I spotted and altered another couple of new category entries for the Home Nations which were inappropriate. Just as before really, keeping a lid on 'by country' whereas nation or less specific doesnt bring the same questions. Keep up the good work by the way. Ian3055 23:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Re: Map

    Hi - do you mean how did I create them? I did a quick summary for Hellinterface, [2] of the process. I am happy to give a full rundown of how things are done for you. Once you have created a couple of maps it is quite straightforward. SFC9394 23:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

    Old dog, new tricks springs to mind! :) Many thanks. If I have probs I'll get in touch (pretty much guaranteed). --Mais oui! 00:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Wikipedia:Most referenced articles

    Regretably, I will not be able to update this page. Please see meta:Toolserver/Reports. -- Beland 00:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] RE: Constituency CfD stuff

    Sorry it took me a while to get back, ive not really been very active on wikipedia for the last few months ( only really started properly editing again today). Ive had a read through the discussion and cant honestly come to a strong opinion on what should be done. I can understand the arguments put forward by the two sides and think both have their merits but i really dont feel either is overwhelmingly a greater option than the other so i cant honsetly vote in favour of either. regards, siarach 10:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] UK Geography Poll - Sock Puppetry

    Hi. I am also getting concerned as to the validity of the poll. You might like to view [[3]] for information of catching sock puppets.

    Best Mdcollins1984 10:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Categories such as "1994 in Law"

    I noticed your amendment to Jamieson v. HMA. I see you've taken the year of the case from the SLT reference. It may well be that Jamieson was decided and the judgment delivered in the same year as it was reported in the Scots Law Times but this is not necessarily the case. I've left it as the matter is a bit pernickety but just thought I should alert you to this. At one point Session Cases and Justiciary Cases (SC, JC) reports were lagging two years behind the actual year of judgment.--Lucifer(sc) 13:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Current-UK-MP-stub

    Hi Mais Oui, as the creator of {{UK-current-MP-stub}}, I have just posted a reply to the SFD for Current British MP stubs, and wondered if you would like to take a look and consider voting aginst deletione. As posted there, having populated the category, it contains over 300 articles, and there are many reasons why I think that this stub category is both viable and useful. Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl 15:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

    Oh lordy. When will this end? The horror, the horror... --Mais oui! 15:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Removal of poll on Welsh nationalism

    Please see the Welsh nationalism talk page before reverting my edit of the poll. As you have noted, "Polls should only be used if their methodology is transparent". The source for this poll does not provide that. Please strive to be consistent in your editing. Thanks. Normalmouth 21:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] One tier

    It states :-

    "Tiered government (a name for each level of local government e.g Truro, Cornwall, UK or Edinburgh, Scotland UK)"

    Ignoring the fact that UK and Scotland are not local governement, the examples given involve every tier. The one tier idea seems to be option 2. josh (talk) 07:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] New South Wales

    You recently added that NSW was named for South Wales. As a New South Welshman, over the years I have heard both this and that it was named for Wales, the south referring to the southern hemisphere. The South Wales version is simpler, but I have never seen a reliable source for either one. Can you shed any light on the matter? JPD (talk) 09:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] List of sports flops

    Hi there. In fact, the AfD that I closed was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List Of Sports Busts, which was a no consensus. Whether it was keep or no consensus, it having been a good number of months you'll be fine going ahead with a new AfD. People will of course point out that it has been tried unsucessfully twice before, and you'll have to justify very very clearly why a new AfD should be considered, but 'ethically' I think you're fine. -Splash - tk 13:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Wikiproject Scotland

    Hi there. I think Wikiproject Scotland can probably begin seeing as it has 12 interested members. Give me a shout when/if it starts and I'll give you a hand promoting it etc. Cheers.  Edits  AntzUK  Talk  23:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] IP Address issue

    Hello Mais oui. That was indeed my contribution. I was unaware that I was not logged on. I shall have to create a sock puppet thingy. Thankyou. Lofty 11:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Request for discussion on edits and page moves on Welsh nationalism/Welsh self-government

    Hi. Can I make a further appeal for you to discuss with me changes to the above article, either made directly by you or at your behest? It is impossible to see how consensus can be reached on the topic otherwise. You said in the complaint made against you by User:Mallimak that "you routinely have to revert [my] edits because they are consistently, and heavily, POV." If so, please, please try and discuss them with me before you move to reverting. I have worked with a number of others to reach consensus on wording for this and other articles, including Plaid Cymru. I have absolutely no inention at all of stopping contributing to Wikipedia, so it really is best if we try and work out our differences. What do you say? Normalmouth 14:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Your "request for deletion" of the List of impoprtant operas

    This seems an extreme position to take with first posting something on the Talk page to raise concerns.

    As I member of the Wiki opera Group, I think that you are overreacting. Let's all discuss the criteria for inclusion.

    Vivaverdi 00:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] No personal attacks

    "The fact that the only user who has created English company categories is Scottish... shows that they are not appropriate."

    That is a clear breach of WP:NPA: "Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views."

    Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Mais oui! 16:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

    That is not a personal attack, but many of your comments on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion are. I can only laugh out loud that someone as short tempered as you is telling others to keep cool (at the same time as threatening them with blocks, which you don't have the means to impose without opening up your own conduct to examination, and if that happened you would be far more likely to get blocked yourself). I was making a legitimate point about your biased POV. To quote Astrotrain in reply to one of your vicious rants, "I think the point he [Osomec] is making is that only you, a user with a distinct anti-British POV is creating these English categories, and that there is no demand from English Wikipedians to cut up the British categories." It is absolutely essential that the underlying basis of your attempts to disrupt Wikipedia are explained to users who are not familiar with your long track record of misconduct, vicious personal attacks and utter hypocrisy. I suggest you should be blocked for one month. Osomec 08:49, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] TfD nomination of Template:Scotland infobox

    Template:Scotland infobox 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. --Durin 18:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] List of the monarchs of the Kingdom of England

    Hi Mais oui!, I noticed you were involved in a dispute with User:TharkunColl over at this article about the name. He is still doing cut-and-paste moves, and has now created an article called List of monarchs of England and Great Britain. Would appreciate your input. --JW1805 (Talk) 02:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

    I did not create that article, I simply retitled it. All reference books list monarchs of England and then Great Britain. TharkunColl 02:47, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Middlesex Cricket Board

    Hi. Just to let you know that WikiProject Cricket is using certain categories as generic to hold various related sub-categories. We have a separate category for governing bodies and administrative units. This article is already in that category, as it should be because it is very useful, but I am removing it from the generic category:Cricket in England - if we left it in there we would have to populate the category with all governing body articles and that is not what the category is designed for. Regards. --BlackJack | talk page 05:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Northern Ireland cricketers

    Hello again. Northern Ireland may be part of the UK but its people are not technically British. Any cricketer in Northern Ireland is Irish both by virtue of nationality and of international team since the Irish Cricket Union encompasses both the component countries, as does rugby football.

    It is therefore incorrect on all counts to include a Northern Irish player in category:British cricketers. He should be in category:Irish cricketers only. However, it's a minor technicality only so I'll leave it. The thing is that if a Northern Ireland player was good enough to play Test cricket, he would actually play for England!

    If you are interested in cricket, would you like to please join the cricket project as new members are always welcome? Regards. --BlackJack | talk page 14:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Country / Place names

    Hi. Can you take a look at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and possibly tell me what you think about my request> -- Maelor  19:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


    [edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:SOCA.jpg)

    Warning sign This file may be deleted.

    Thanks for uploading Image:SOCA.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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.

    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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Kevin_b_er 01:05, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Scottish celebrities

    Was Category:Scottish celebrities empty when you last saw it? It's tagged with an incorrect speedy delete tag and is currently empty - i'm minded to deleted it, but It'd be good to find out if someone has been clearing it out... Thanks/wangi 20:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

    It is not a major issue, but Alan Mcilwraith does not really qualify as a "Scottish celebrity" so do not be surprised if somebody removes this again.--Ianmacm 08:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Scotland

    Hi Mais, good work in getting this up and running. I've not been overly productive of late and didn't manage to contribute to the initial discussions, but will toddle along in time, add myself to the member list and start some proper work. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Tapadh leibh!

    Thusly is Mais oui! awarded this Scottish Barnstar of National Merit for of his tirless and selfless furthering of the presence of Scotland on Wikipedia. Tapadh leibh! Canæn
    Thusly is
    Mais oui!
    awarded this Scottish Barnstar of National Merit for of his tirless and selfless furthering of the presence of Scotland on Wikipedia.

    Tapadh leibh!

    Image:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn Image:Icons-flag-scotland.png

    I've been gone a few months, but I'm back. I took a look at all the notices you've been leaving me. I'm not ready to jump back in to everything, but I will make an effort to be around. It looks like you've been hard at work, what with transfering things to the WikiProject, and covering every problem that comes up. It's high time an award for Scotland came in to existence, and I can think of no other so deserving as yourself. Image:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn Image:Icons-flag-scotland.png 07:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Project 'claims' or 'ownership'

    Hey Mais oui! With regard to our discussion on my talk page on this subject, I've been meaning to give you a link to this section of the V1.0 Editorial Team talk. Basically I think the consensus at the minute is that if multiple tags are on articles (talk pages) then that's a Good Thing. And that makes sense to me - after all, the more editors we can attract to the articles, the more likely we are to get them improved. :) --Mal 18:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

    Sorry to butt in - wised up WikiProjects are now generally claiming that articles are "within their scope" rather than "part of WikiProject X". Of course it's quite possible for an article to be within the scope of more than one project. Also by claiming only part of scope it's not annoying people who worked on an article only to have a Project come in and claim "ownership" of it. --kingboyk 19:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
    That sounds fair enough - its a matter of politeness really. :) I'll have a look and make the relevant changes to 'my' projects. --Mal 01:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Sean Connery

    Please don't revert changes without one word of explanation. —Chowbok 20:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Wikiproject: Scotland

    Thank you for your message, and invitation to join Wikiproject:Scotland. I have added my name to the list of members. Regards Astrotrain 13:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Callanish

    If you get a second, could you have a quick look at my comment and suggestion here and let me know what your thoughts are? Cheers! Lianachan 16:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Poll Tax Riots

    From Talk:Poll Tax Riots Would you be prepared to make the following compromise:

    ? Tim! 21:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] "Crookery"

    No problem whatsoever. I actually "stold" it long ago from another user. It has gone through a number of permutations in the meantime. I appreciate those who take time to use a template like this. I really think it helps new users know how things work in our community. Best, Kukini 16:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Scrooge v. Libertarianism

    I've added a section “Scrooge v. Libertarianism” to the the talk page for Ebenezer Scrooge. —75.18.113.152 06:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Biography Newsletter September 2006

    The September 2006 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. plange 23:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Scottish companies

    But these should be tagged only as {{Scotland-stub}}s and not as organizations - they're companies and not organizations.--CarabinieriTTaallkk 21:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

    • Theoretically I'd agree with you - companies merely are a type of economic organizations, but {{company-stub}} is not a child of {{org-stub}}. On the other hand I just noticed that the companies-category is a child of the organizations-category, so I guess we (the StubSorting Project) just might be wrong in how we categorized things. The best solution might be to make {{company-stub}} a child of org-stub and then tag the articles in question as Scotland-org-stubs.--CarabinieriTTaallkk 21:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


    [edit] Discussion currently underway at List of major opera composers, List of important operas and the article Opera regarding POV and sources

    I read your comments during the AfD of the List of important operas and thought that you would be interested in reading what is currently happening on the page Talk:List of major opera composers and Talk:Opera regarding sourcing materials and correcting POV statements. It seems that there have been quite a bit of sloppy editting going on in the area of Opera for quite some time and that there is a great deal of resistence to change. I would like to have your view of these discussions and perhaps some ideas for solutions, if you've got time. cordially Musikfabrik 09:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Scotland Infobox

    If you object to my changes to the infobox, I'm very happy to discuss them with you - and hopefully arrive t a satisfactory solution. But 'restore infobox' isn't a reasoned discussion, it is just reverting without explanation. Take it to the talk page. --Doc 12:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] link to Basque Country

    Hello, when you want to link to the article about the Basque Country, please do not link to Basque Country, as that is a disambiguation page (which nothing should be linked to). Instead link to the one of the options found on that page such as Basque Country (autonomous community) by writing out [[Basque Country (autonomous community)|Basque Country]]. Regards, Jeff3000 21:10, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Counties of Scotland

    Added a comment on this article which you also contributed to, regarding your rebuke to that Owain, Yorkshire Phoenix Association of British Counties-type mob. Benson85 23:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] What time o day div ye ca this

    Gee whiz, man. Ye're either up very late or very early! Editing Wikipedia at this time in the morning ? -- Derek Ross | Talk 06:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

    Wickedness is it, <grin> ? Well, well, I'll leave you to your evil ways then. It's midnight here and that's late enough for me. A soft and comfortable bed is calling to me and it's sounding better and better! Cheers -- Derek Ross | Talk 06:13, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] National Gallery of Scotland

    Hi Mais, thanks for the note. Nice work and a good start on expanding the article. I didn't realise how under developed our gallery articles were. I'm still not feeling particularly creative at the moment, but I'll don the thinking cap and go ferretting around other gallery articles to make a start on assessing how things can be improved. This could be a nice project to convert me back to a "proper" editor again :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 07:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Thanks

    Thanks for starting the survey on Orkney. Having made the request, I wasn't sure how to proceed. Abtract 08:38, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Wells, a dressed wi' clooties or no'

    Thanks for your help sorting out the well dressing, clootie well, etc issues! --Kathryn NicDhàna 19:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

    Pleasure. --Mais oui! 19:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] K&A canal

    Ages ago yu added some content to the article on the Kennet and Avon Canal. I've done some work on this and the Locks on the Kennet and Avon Canal and have put them both up for featured status see discussions at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Locks on the Kennet and Avon Canal & Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Kennet and Avon Canal. I'd be grateful if you had anything you could add to either article or the discussions. — Rod talk 12:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Convener = Lord Provost?

    Local Government etc. (Scotland) Act 1994 Section 4(7) The convener of each of the councils of the cities of Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow shall, with effect from 1st April 1996, be known by the title of "Lord Provost", and the convener of each other council shall be known by such title as that council may decide: Provided that no such other council may, without the consent of the Secretary of State, decide that their convener shall be known by the title of "Lord Provost".[4] Lozleader 20:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

    According to Edinburgh City Council "The Provost is also Convener of the Council and continues to carry out the normal duties of an elected member, so fulfils both political and ceremonial duties."[5]
    From Glasgow's site: "Under the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1994 all Councils must elect a convener (chair) from among the elected councillors. Councils can change the title of Convener to Provost, Chair or whatever they consider appropriate. However, the Conveners of the cities of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Dundee are to be known as Lord Provost." [6]
    Aberdeen and Dundee don't seem to use the term convener (except for committees) as far as I can see.

    Lozleader 20:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

    This is getting confusing! Councillor is chair of the executive... I haven't seen listed as the convener... He is the convener of the executive which is also the leader of the executive, but the executive is just acommittee of the council isn't it???
    Lozleader 20:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
    Crossed messages! I think we agree. Should I revert the page? Lozleader 20:53, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] List of important operas

    I'm not sure if you're thinking of nominating this list for deletion again: but if so, could I ask you to wait. We've all been fixing the List of major opera composers, using 61 inline citations and independant sources to compile the list. I fully realise that an identical "rescue job" needs to be performed. Best, Moreschi 16:57, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Orkney

    Your latest edit doesn't make sense; maybe you would like to try again.Abtract 22:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Mossley

    I thought you may be interested in this. It could potentially set a standard which other users would want to role out elsewhere. Jhamez84 22:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

    --We would also certainly benefit from your input at this talk page. Keep up the great work! Thanks, Jhamez84 00:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Leave it!

    Look, Mallimka is blocked for now. Know when to stop. -Splash - tk 22:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

    Checkuser may or may not be appropriate, but continuing to make what are certain to be provocative edits to a blocked user's talk page, particularly when it is principally you who is 'benefitting' from the block is not a good course of action. File a checkuser if you like, although you might wait until Mallimak's block expires out of courtesy, but don't be provocative while he's already unhappen. He just got blocked for being provocative, so it's not a road that has a happy ending. -Splash - tk 23:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
    No, I'm not planning to file a checkuser request. If you want one done, then it's up to you to see to that. If you are already satisfied with what an earlier checkuser has reported then I don't see the need for another. Mallimak is not able to "make a mockery of the project" whilst he cannot edit it. Take solace in that fact, at least. -Splash - tk 23:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Old version

    How bizarre. Thanks for letting me know. Mrsteviec 08:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Wikimail

    I have sent you two wikimail. If you don't want to answer... that is fine. I am writing here simply in case you do not usually check the email address you registered here. // habj 11:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Talk:List of RSPB reserves

    Hi - could I point you towards this page as you have contributed to this list (& still are active). I think it could be improved but would rather have a wider range of views. If you are not interested sorry to bother you. Regards --Herby talk to me 10:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

    Not just the birds that migrate then! I found a couple yesterday. Thanks for the input, good to have it and I'll get back to you and the article after polishing the brain --Herby talk to me 10:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Mop?

    Hi there! I've noticed your extensive and competent contributions to diverse areas of Wikipedia. As such I was wondering if you were interested in a nomination for adminship. Yours, >Radiant< 12:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Conservative or Unionist party tags in Scotland

    Just added this discussion to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Parliament constituencies page. Any input from yourself would be greaty appreciated. Thanks. Galloglass 12:15, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

    Really would appreciate you taking part in this discussion Mais oui!, epsecially as you are the main proponent of the 'Unionist' tag. Thanks Galloglass 23:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Scottish counties

    It looks like an attempt to apply current data to historic units and pass it all off as current. The census may well use historic units for comparison purposes, which is what one would expect it to do as it is used for longitudinal study. To assert anything about the status of the units based on that data is original research/synthesis and outside of the scope of Wikipedia. Mrsteviec 12:02, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

    In which case it is worse than I at first thought. Definitely original research and also citing a primary source that doesn't give the figures you are using it for. Very poor show. Mrsteviec 12:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Scottish Parliament constituency maps

    I sent you an email but with regards to the maps I am creating them using information from the boundary commission for Scotland the only reason I am doing it is because it was annoying me as the UK parliament consistencies all have maps and the election is next year, if you would like to try and create a map for you I would be more than willing to help and as for the constituency template I have created one but I am not sure how to work out the council area as most of the consistencies are within more than one councils boundary here is what I have so far User:Br2387/Sandbox.--Barrytalk 00:28, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] The Scotland Edit

    All right, what was the incorrect wiki info which you mentioned on your edit? Celtmist 11:47, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

    I so beg your pardon! We weren't to know. The purpose of my edit was simply to change the opening sentence stating that the land (hence the article itself) is a nation (a term referring to a people). But of course the Scots are indeed a nation in every sense which is why I mentioned it two lines down. If you are all right with it, we'll keep it, if not, perhaps we could look at the first line being that Scotland is a home nation within the UK or something similar. Let me know what you think. Celtmist 17:13, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Keith Marischal

    Ta for help on my over enthusiastic grammatics/bad typing! Mansion house/ Estate house? I dunno, they all tend to be pretty big non defensive buildings. ...splitting heirs slightly, I used to live in this one, and it was pretty run down, but Maxwell's gazetteer of Scotland 1902 does describe it as a Mansion house, and it did have bells on the lower corridor ;-).Brendandh 21:46, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Scotland/Estates

    Could you please see my edit at Talk:French States-General#Scotland, since it refers to your edit? Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 04:10, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] clubs and societies in Scotland

    No problem, it's a bit empty atm, but I'm sure you'll help fill it up ;) Tim! 16:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Arthur Travers Harris

    If you are going to change section headings then please make sure that any internal references link to the new section headings, (it is even harder to check external links to section headings). Most of the footnotes link to the Bibliography section which thanks to your edit is now not correct. --Philip Baird Shearer 19:22, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Shetland

    Hi. That was your fourth revert, you know. Would you mind self-reverting? --Guinnog 22:15, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

    Yes, it was.

    --Guinnog 22:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

    True. My apologies. Edit-warring is still frowned upon and 3 reverts in 24 hours are not an entitlement. --Guinnog 22:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    I have blocked the user for 3RR violation. I am concerned that you are not necessarily dealing with your conflict with the user in the most productive way. I know your history and it might be better not to have anything to do with this user, though I recognise that may be difficult. Best wishes --Guinnog 23:00, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    As I said, I have blocked the other user you were edit-warring with. Beyond that I don't know what you would expect me to do. You are actually wrong on the matter you were warring over and I will edit the article to reflect that. See [7] for example. I won't revert though, I'll formulate a neutral compromise and I recommend this course of action to you in future disagreements. --Guinnog 23:14, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Parliament of Scotland

    With response to;

    Well, I see absolutely no reason whatsoever that the list article cannot include meetings of Lords of the Articles, the General Council, the Convention of Estates, and any other committees or related meetings. In fact, the more comprehensive and descriptive the better: better than a bare list of dates.

    I agree, nothing wrong with it being concise, just a lot of research involved. I've made a start with creating new article Scottish Reformation Parliament. Seems as good a place as any to start. Benson85 19:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] "National Portrait Gallery (United Kingdom)" – not as English as you'd think...

    Hi Mais oui! I noticed the change of title you recently gave to "National Portrait Gallery (United Kingdom)" to reflect the fact that it's specifically in England, and that there's a Scottish National Portrait Gallery as well. There's a slight problem with that, because the Gallery's perspective is pan-British (and beyond that, extends to people like Wallis Simpson who have strong ties with British history in some way). One of its founders was the very Scottish Thomas Carlyle. So I think the "England" in parentheses is misleading, although I can see why you might think that "United Kingdom" is contentious. May I suggest either National Portrait Gallery (London) or National Portrait Gallery, London as an alternative?

    The option with a comma follows the example of National Gallery, London, but that's because it's the way the National Gallery styles itself on its website to distinguish it from all the other National Galleries. I'm not clear on whether it's correct to use a comma when disambiguating an article title, as with e.g. Strand, London, or the more usual parentheses. Any thoughts? [talk to the] HAM 21:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

    PS: A third option would be to revert to National Portrait Gallery (United Kingdom) to reflect its scope, while making clear in a disambig notice that it's not the only NPG in Britain. Something like:

    This article is about the National Portrait Gallery based in London. Also in the United Kingdom, but unconnected to this institution, is the Scottish National Portrait Gallery in Edinburgh

    After looking at the disambig page for National Portrait Gallery, I think that it makes more sense to have the name of the country in the article – in which case it would have to be United Kingdom, not England. Regards, [talk to the] HAM 21:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

    PPS: User:Badgerpatrol has joined in the discussion on Talk:National Portrait Gallery (England), so could you please leave your response there rather than here? Many thanks, [talk to the] HAM 21:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Only warning

    You are picking fights with this [8] kind of edit. Please stop. This is your only remaining warning, or I'm going to have stop you the hard way. Know when to put things down. -Splash - tk 22:36, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

    Well, yes, it seems obvious enough that the IP is Mallimak; he can dispute that if he like but it won't wash. I still don't see the value in reverting someone else's userpage when you can be reasonably sure that it'll inflame. -Splash - tk 22:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
    He doesn't like you. That's ok, though. I'm tired to death of seeing the two of you go at it, and it takes two to tango. I'll not stand for it from Mallimak, nor from you. Protestations of "yebbut, he's really bad too" won't wash. I'll blank his user page. Then neither of you have anything. What you will have, however, is to stop. -Splash - tk 22:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Scottish Parliament

    Just to let you know, I've submitted the Scottish Parliament article for a Peer Review to see what areas can be improved on. Thanks Globaltraveller 13:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Category:Scottish people by council area

    Hello. As someone who appears to have set-up most of the categorisation of Scottish people by council area, I wondered if you might have an opinion on this? Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_November_2#Category:People_from_Motherwell As you can see from the arguement, I personally thought the system as it was previously worked well. The new pages (People from Arbroath and People from Motherwell) were created by a new user for their recently produced articles - I doubt they intend to populate them with other people from Motherwell (eg Colin Fox, Gary McAllister etc). Sorry to trouble you if this is of no interest.Caledonian Place 12:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] British MPs/UK MPs

    Hi Mais oui, I'd value your thoughts on Category_talk:British_MPs#Renaming_subcategories_after_restructuring. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:25, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

    I was in a bit of a rush this morning, so please accept my apologies for not writing sooner to thank you for the headsup at User talk:BrownHairedGirl#Jumping the gun (with my schedule this week, I would probably have missed it otherwise). As you'll see at the CFD, the nominator has kindly agreed to withdraw the proposal so that a new CFD can be started, and I'm in the process of doing that. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] NPG

    See my thoughts on your latest move on the appropriate talk page. Why you choose to ignore Wiki etiquette (not to mention basic politness) and carry out actions of this kind without any consultation really escapes me. If there is consensus for this move, please show me when and where it was arrived at. Badgerpatrol 08:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Wha daur meddle wi' me

    This is not the motto of Scotland. It is the motto of the Black Watch Regiment. I cite your own source.

    'It is perhaps inevitable that during the last three centuries of bludgeoning Britain's foes the Black Watch has... ...Their motto is Nemo me impune lacessit - which translates as, "touch me not with impunity," or more commonly, "wha daur meddle wi' me".', [The Daily Telegraph, 25 October 2004]

    More research needs to be done.

    Besides, the Scots translation should be on the [Scots Language version of Wikipedia], not the English language version. We don't have the Gaelic translation of the Latin either. The Scots language version gives a slightly different translation too: "Naebodie chaws me wi impunity" which would be closer to the Latin. Though not referenced. Rincewind42 12:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] List of Scotland-related topics

    I've done a re-write of List of Scotland-related topics, heavily based on the topics template. I'd welcome your comments via my talk or the discussion page at the article. Cheers! Berek 15:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] RBS

    You should see Talk:Royal Bank of Scotland, where Astrolain is pushing his Scottophobic POV. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 23:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


    [edit] Wodehouse quote

    Hullo ! I'm partial to Wodehouse on sunbeams and Scotchmen, but I'm pretty sure your user page misquotes him. I don't have the book to hand, but the askoxford.com site gives it as:

       
    User talk:Mais oui
    | It is never difficult to distinguish between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine.
       
    User talk:Mais oui

    Here's one by a Mr Christopher North, for other occasions:

       
    User talk:Mais oui
    | It gives me true pleasure to declare, that, as a people, the English are very little indeed inferior to the Scotch.
       
    User talk:Mais oui

    Last, but not least, some medieval French guy said:

       
    User talk:Mais oui
    | Que d’Escossois, de rats, de poux,
    Ceux qui voyagent jus qu’au bout
    Du monde, en rencontrent partout.
       
    User talk:Mais oui

    I don't know if being compared to a rat or a flea is flattery or not. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Supporters of political parties in the United Kingdom

    Hi, Mais oui! It may interest you to know if you did not already that these categories have unfortunately just been nominated for deletion. I note you have contributed to them and thank you for it. Your comments would be welcome. Thanks Dovea 19:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Dispute templates

    Please don't remove dispute templates while the dispute still exists. And the article is about the Group- not just the retail bank arm. Astrotrain 22:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Category:Scottish trade unions

    Just a heads up that I nominated this category, which you created, to be renamed to Category:Trade unions of Scotland to match other entries in Category:Trade unions by country. Tim! 18:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] "Politics of Scotland" edit

    Hi, I added the line into the section on the Scottish Parliament referendum just as an additional bit of useful background info. You say "this was after a lot of things" - obviously, but Blair's statement in June 1996 (p.95, Pilkington, Devolution Today - reference) did "set in stone" how the referendum would be conducted. TG312274 01:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

    Oh sorry the URL you need is...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Politics_of_Scotland&diff=87853004&oldid=87830570 TG312274 01:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Underconsturction template

    I think you have confused the { { underconstruction } } template with the { { inuse } } template. The former is is a invitation to other people to expand, add more material and edit existing article. Rincewind42 09:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Politics of Scotland Template

    I don't know why your so obssessed with putting this template on every single page you can think of. I am prepared to allow it on Scotland Act 1998- but it needs to go from the other acts- they are not related to politics or govt. Astrotrain 22:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Jogging

    Cher Mais oui!, I have had a look at the Geography section on the Sotland page. Its inadequacies include: a) A largely irrelevant historical section. b) A confused set of subdivisions which place far too much emphasis on the islands. c) Trivia. d) Most puzzlingly, no geology at all! When I get some time I would like to attempt a serious clean up, and whilst I am not requesting your permission I’d value your advice. There may be ‘history’ or protocol here I am unaware of. Ben MacDui (Talk) 13:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

    There's a final draft revision here which I will put up public notices about tomorrow Insha'Allah. Ben MacDui (Talk) 20:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] NPG Talk

    I appear to be the inadvertent mangler! Thanks for catching this and restoring the talk page. Badgerpatrol 15:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Scottish national identity

    I've opened a Request for Comment on Scottish national identity. As an editor with previous involvement in this article, you may wish to add a statement or comment. Best wishes, --YFB ¿ 18:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Clement of Dunblane

    Hi. Can you do me and wikipedia a big favour and give Clement of Dunblane a quick copyedit (sentences structures, unclear info, etc). I'm personally happy with it, but as it's up for FA, it has to satisfiy a broad range of editorally tastes. Best regards, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 13:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

    I know. He just seems to be one of those users with an axe to grind. He just needs watching. I just wish he would be more open to use of talk pages. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and suggest he's constrained for time atm; if that's the case, he may well become more reasonable later on. Regards, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] European Curling Championship(s)

    Hi, may I ask you why you changed European Curling Championships into European Curling Championship? It's not just one championship that is held, but there are two. OK, there's only one Championship per gender, without any other disciplines, but in my opinion there are still more than one Championships to be held. Also on the official website of the 2006 edition they use Championships. Cheers, SportsAddicted | discuss 02:55, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

    I definately agree about the redirect, which is now solved. However, I don't think it's "the standard" on Wikipedia to use the singular instead of the plural. I've seen both versions in many sports articles all over Wikipedia and just like you said I'm pretty sure that lot's of them actually need renaming according to the official name which is given at the official website or any other reliable source. When I create an article like that I try to do it like that as much as possible. If no information on that is available then I would say check out the number of Championships to be held. Is it just one, then use the singular, are there more, then use the plural. SportsAddicted | discuss 03:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Irish flag

    Just shows you! I should have read the intro :-) Bill Reid | Talk 10:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] WikiProject

    Mais oui! good luck with your new WikiProject. Is the assessment department active yet? I listed an article there and wonder when the papers will be graded. -Susanlesch. (Time stamp maybe about 28 December? I don't recall.)

    • FWIW, I graded this one myself, although I don't have any credentials, B seems about right considering the prose is out of balance with the lists, and doesn't say a word about many things. Best wishes for the New Year. -Susanlesch 20:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC) minor edits at :09.

    [edit] Key Extracts

    I have created a draft of ‘Key Extracts from the Talk: Scotland Archives’ here. My intention is to create something that could be used as a handy guide for new contributors to the Scotland article, which after appropriate discussion would be moved to a new page and referenced on the Talk:Scotland page in due course. I’d value your comments. Please feel free to direct other Scottish Wikipedians to it. Cc Users Mais Oui!, Calgacus, Globaltraveller, Angus Maclennan, Billreid, Canæn. A Merry Xmas to all. Ben MacDui (Talk) 20:39, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Season's greetings and all that

    Hope you're well. Today I visited the National Museums of Scotland. I don't know if you've been, but it's worth the trip. First time I've been to a museum or the like in Scotland since I was but a little chap, and that wasn't last week. All the best for 2007! Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Apology

    I'd just like to repeat my apology again here. Thanks for removing the warning message - the whole thing seems to be a simple misunderstanding about naming. I'm sorry, again, for making the wrong assumption. Tevildo 07:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] cycle bio stub

    Merci pour la correction. I will correct my AWB replace expressions. STTW (talk) 09:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Going wild

    I wonder if you could give me a little advice. I'm drafting an article on the Fauna of Scotland and I have come across Wildlife of Scotland. I think its fair to say it's a start class article and does not even mention flora. (Fauna = animals only of course, 'wildlife' = flora and fauna). Would you advise ignoring it (easy to do, but a bit supine), creating the Fauna article and suggesting a merge, or a deletion, requesting a move for Wildlife to Fauna and then replacing its content (all of which might be time-consuming or complex), or... ? I note the existence of Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Scotland. Any advice or pointers gratefully received. Ben MacDui (Talk) 10:38, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

    You just beat me to the latest Scotland rv! The new page is now live. If not you, who do I ask, or where do I look for input/advice? WP:SCOWNB? Ben MacDui (Talk) 15:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Scotland articles lacking citation

    Replied on my talk page, since you kindly reverted my addition to the Scotland Project page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Constituent country conventions

    Hi Mais oui!, hope all is well.

    If ever there is a user who will know, I'm sure it'll be yourself (!) - is there (or rather where can I find) a convention/consenus/guideline page regarding the use of the constituent countries vs United Kingdom as the primary geography frame of reference when discussing locations?

    I know there are some loose guidelines on the WikiProject UK geo (which state we use the C.C.), but any others? Hope you can help. Kindest regards, Jhamez84 00:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Thanks

    For moving Glasgow Emancipation Society. If you know anyone who could help with research, that would be lovely. I haven't been able to find good sources other than primary ones. Thanks again, NinaOdell | Talk 13:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] "Natives of"

    Hi. I liked your answer on the CfD page for Oslo natives, and have expressed a similar view on the discussion for Category:Natives of Transylvania. I just wish that people had thought about the reasonable point you make before they started merging so many objective categoruies into subjective ones (which has ruined a lot of work). Dahn 10:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Vancouver

    Your changes to the article Vancouver were changed. The subject of keeping the Union Jack Flag or having duel flags was an on-going conversation that was being resolved. Please check the Talk:Vancouver before you make any changes further changes. Vancouver is a featured article and seems to get a lot of attention, especially in the controversal areas. Thanks =) Mkdwtalk 21:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

    I left my comments on Talk:Vancouver#Request_for_Comment:Which_flag.28s.29_should_accompany_Edinburgh.3F Mkdwtalk 11:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
    You should assume good faith per WP:CIVIL. It was an honest mistake, and you're being unreasonably rude about it. I changed it back WITH the edit summary and you will see my edit summary does support what I was trying to do in my blank one. Don't WP:BITE new comers to Wikipedia. I'm sure you've made mistakes when you first came to Wikipedia. I'll let my contributions to Wikipedia determine what type of person I am, not by the threatening messages I leave on other people's pages. You should know that reverting should be labelled as a minor edit anyway, as was advised to me by an admin -- it wasnt some ploy. Mkdwtalk 12:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Advice

    Please take note of my comments at Talk:Vancouver#No need for any flag. Thanks/wangi 14:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] re: Couple of maps

    No problem, I will do them at the weekend. I had originally intended to get through all of the Scottish settlements and get maps done + get infoboxes in place where they aren't used (there are still a few places that don't use them), but time seems to keep washing away. SFC9394 22:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] User notice: 3rr

    [edit] Regarding reversions[9] made on January 23, 2007 to Vancouver

    Warning

    Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.

    You are a sensible person. Please self-revert before you ge blocked

    William M. Connolley 14:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Scottish Labour

    I think one reference is probably fine, and out of the three this one is focused purely on the fact we are wanting to cite. The others might well be of use on the John McTernan article (probably already there). On my watchlist now. Ta/wangi 11:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Former? royal burghs or not?

    Have a look at my reply at [10]. I haven't removed them, but changed them to "former royal burghs", which is what they are called by (for example):

    • Highland Council [11]
    • Fife Council [12]
    • North Ayrshire council [13], *Renfrewshire Council [14] (page 17),
    • Dumfries and Galloway Council[15] (page 117)

    I don't have the full text of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 which might contain some saving as to the "royal burgh" status after the abolition of the local government burghs and town councils? The burgh Common Good funds are now administered by the area councils, but perhaps the inhabitants of (former?) burghs enjoy some privileges under their charters? As I noted on the above mentioned user talk page, all the burgh arms reverted to the crown as the entities that owned them were explicitly abolished. Many of these have since been regranted, either to district councils, area councils or community councils, which could hardly happen if the burghs still existed.

    However, I am open to persuasion. I do hope this doesn't turn into a traditional counties type argument :-(....

    We should probably continue this conversation over at Talk:Royal burgh

    Lozleader 23:11, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

    I shall post at Talk:Royal burgh. David Lauder 18:22, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Thanks

    Thanks ;-) And thanks for all your help. Globaltraveller 20:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] :-))

    Yes, my consensual skills are probably on a par with yours! Very lucky living in the sticks, nobody hears the angst ridden screams. :) Brendandh 18:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Twin towns

    Cities must be list for countries, not for states. Bye and good work. --Attilios 10:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

    If you continue, I'll mention you as disruptor of three revert rule'. Bye. --Attilios 10:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
    You have violated the three revert rule, and I've mentioned it. So, the only one abusing are you. Bye. --Attilios 11:19, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
    You should have provided something more than a restore in the edit summary, also when restoring something 4 or 5-edits far. IMHO, most people involved in voting there for showing Scottish flag were clearly Scottish. If you called in some Italian or Burkina Faso, maybe the poll would go differently. But that's all. Personally, I agree that we should show the independent state flag, otherwise here we would get lost in a innumerable confusion. But I think it's hard to let this understand to a Scottish or a Welsh. Bye. --Attilios 11:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
    I've received notes that you've a fame of edit warmonger... so maybe I should reconsider your stance and if you're truly right in the twin towns format matter. In fact, that you didn't reply immediately when I posted on your Talk was not a good move accord to Wikiquette. Bye.

    I repeat. I've nothing against you, but your lack of reply and your frenzy restoring rage after I firstly inquired you on your talk still looks suspect. --Attilios 15:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

    If you had had the courtesy of replying to my very first edit in your talk, everything would be settled. But I'm starting to see, from your talk and your deeds otherwhere, that you're not so much into such behaviours... but in different others. It's full of 3RR and warmonging accuses against you here: what do you reply? --Attilios 15:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

    I used the pop-up because you looked clearly as a vandal. Maybe you aren't. But you're still unable to tell me why you didn't reply my first inquiring in your talk, and avoid that all. From what I see (also the deleting of messages from anonymous user, even if sockpuppets, is also not such a good practice), and from your language, you look the one needing some more calm. --Attilios 15:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Geology of England

    Hiya, I notice you removed the geological map from the Geology of England article. I've added it back in for the time being, because I think it's quite an important change, and ought to be discussed. But I've started a thread about it on the talk page, if you want to explain why you think it shouldn't be on there then please do feel free to come and talk about it. Cheers, Eve 12:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Personal wars

    I didn't care too much about what unnamed IPs write me. But please don't fight your wars on my talk page. Did you address him on the apposite page? Bye and good work (PS... next Sunday they'll play Scotland-Italy!!! Who will won?) --Attilios 15:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] rv WP:FLAGS

    I noticed that you placed a number of edits today with the above editsummary. I don't know if you actually read the essay in question, but it does specifically mention this kind of editwaring currently happening due to the use of flags where there really is no need. Agathoclea 21:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

    I don't know much about flag wars but I do not see the point in demonstrating flags of non-sovereign states over the sovereign state. I do though have a fair idea as to why this has been done in the case of the United Kingdom, and that is because it furthers a nationalist agenda to seprate the four home nations. That is quite sad. It is sad because, in the pushing of this agenda, a double-standard is blatantly revealed. If the United Kingdom is not to be represented in the details of the British cities that are twinned with cities in other countries, why are nations like the United States or Spain represented? Why would the user Mais Oui! revert flags to England and Wales, but leave Barcelona under the flag of Spain and not Catalonia? Catalonia has a far larger movement towards independence than Scotland, England and Wales combined. Yes, I have a 'unionist agenda', but I also like to see balance, and the logic in this case is towards the nation state. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Enzedbrit (talk • contribs) 05:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC).
    I'm sorry but I don't know why you'd tell me to stop Flag Warring and then go and undo the changes that I had made which is, to my view, inciting a 'flag war'. It appears that you are forcing a separatist agenda by reverting flags to those of non-sovereign states in selective areas but leaving others untouched. Why is this? I think that you owe the contributors and visitors to Wikipedia an explanation. Enzedbrit 05:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] 3RR

    Chriscf has NOT broken 3RR at this point, and I don't believe he will. Both have you have been running on the edge of incivility, but neither have broken into fully blown personal attacks that I can see. However slapping a prefromed warning template on an established editors talk page can be seen as very rude. I suggest you both calm down, keep out of others way for a while or step away from the computer for an hour or so to calm down - there is no point in getting angry over wikipedia. When you do return to the computer/that article, please discuss the relevant changes ON THE TALK PAGE, and try and gain consensus one way or the other. Similar comments are being posted on the other editors talk page. ViridaeTalk 12:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] British Isles

    What are you doing? I am in the process of changing the stupid and crap article "Population genetics of the British Isles" into an article about settlement of the British Isles prior to 1066. The reason for this is because there is dire need of an article that gives an outline of the various theories regarding the settlement of the British Isles, specifically the evidence for cultural transimssion versus mass migration. It is incorrect to state that 1066 is not a relevant date for other countries in the British Isles besides England. The Norman Conquest did not stop with England, the Normans went on to invade Wales and Ireland. Besides which, if your sole problem is with the fact that the article mentioned the UK, this was simply because it still needed some work. If you think this is a problem, then you should use the same criteria for the article Immigration to the United Kingdom (until 1922), the vast majority of which time the United Kingdom did not exist. This was one of the main motivating factors for removing information from this article to the Settlement article, because the UK didn't exist. But apparently the second article is fine by you, which displays a certain bias IMHO. Anyway I'm fed up with nationalists who see everything through a myopic and xenophobic lense. Alun 19:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

    Ok, how about "Prehistoric settlement of the British Isles" or "Prehistoric settlement of Great Britain and Ireland"? This article cannot be about population genetics and then make the claim that people form the British Isles are mainly descended from Iberia. This would constitute a POV-fork, that is, an article that is created in order to give only a single point of view. It must include evidence about cultural diffusion and migration. I am more than happy to discuss alternative titles if you do not like the current title. Getting into a strop is not constructive, why don't you do something constructive and actually suggest a title of your own? Alun 15:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Mountain Biking on Mount Tamalpais

    Hello, An article that I created as a part of Wikiproject Cycling called Mountain Biking on Mount Tamalpais and linked to the Mount Tamalpais article, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mountain Biking on Mount Tamalpais. Thank you, Bob in Las Vegas -  uriel8  (talk) 09:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Your talk page

    Since you're being hit repeatedly by anons, you might want to request temporary semi-protection for your talk page to see if it blows over. SP of user talk pages is usually considered the prerogative of the user concerned, so I have not requested it on your behalf. Chris cheese whine 11:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

    Ta. I am not actually being repeatedly attacked by "anons". The User who has been repeatedly attacking me for many months now is very far from being anonymous:
    Thanks for the heads up though. I was not aware of that possibility, and it is worth considering. --Mais oui! 12:09, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
    See "anons" read "not-logged-in users".  :-) Though I second what was said on AN/I - get your backside over to WP:RFCU and see if you can get the "suspected" sockpuppets confirmed while you still can (logged-in user IPs are discarded permanently after 6 months IIRC). Chris cheese whine 12:17, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
    Why should I waste my time? It very, very clearly falls under "Obvious, disruptive sock puppet" - "Block. No checkuser is necessary". Unfortunately, the Admins know all about this, but because I am such a deeply unpopular User in certain quarters, including with many Admins, they have chosen to just allow Mallimak to continue baiting me unhindered. It is time for the impartial Admins to act. I have done all that I can reasonably be expected to do. --Mais oui! 12:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
    So, uh, what action do you propose they take? Blocking ceases to be effective when people start moving around different IP ranges. Chris cheese whine 12:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
    The only action that I can see that will actually work is that Mallimak, and all his identified sockpuppets, is indefinitely banned. Then, whenever he starts using a new IP, we can report this to a designated Admin, who immediately blocks him.
    If Mallimak ever decides that he genuinely would like to contribute positively to Wikipedia, he can request removal of the indef block. This should only be granted if he owns up to his past actions, and apologises, something which I just cannot see happening, because his contributions really have been cringe-inducing, and ít would take a great deal of courage to own up to that pattern of behaviour. Such courage is extremely rare, but I do believe in the concept of Redemption. --Mais oui! 12:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Deletion of category of BBC Sports Awards

    I'm sorry if I came across as NN-ing the whole of Scotland in my post - certainly not my intention! By way of apology, may I draw your attention to Charles Foster (Celticist)John Fraser (Celticist)? Just a little something I created earlier today, based on the little information I had, but I thought it might warrant some TLC from Project Scotland. Best wishes. Bencherlite 17:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

    You'd think I would have got the name right, having written the page, wouldn't you...?1 Bencherlite 13:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Sport in England

    I just took the existing Sport in the United Kingdom article and removed the non-English bits and changed 'British' to 'English' where appropriate. I think it is fairly easy to extend the article just using existing wikipedia articles. The only real problem is how to cover the sports which are structured along British lines such as athletics.GordyB 13:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Aberdeen assessment

    Ding it doun! Blood red sandman is usually hot on the trail of these things, although I am not sure what the assessments achieve. That aside, a kindly person recently left me a note about a new article I wrote. "I...suggest that you propose it as a future 'selected article' on Scotland portal too. Or, since Scotland is leading the way on renewables in the UK, perhaps on the UK portal?" I will ask he/she what they mean, because I have no idea. Could you give me some sage advice? (Perhaps here in case it precipitates a diplomatic incident)? Ta, Ben MacDui (Talk) 19:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] UK place infobox

    You have my support with regards to Owain's edits, the conventions and consensus is clear - that infomation is not suitable for that particular section. However, I think it should be included, but not within the same (main) geographic system section. Your thoughts? Jhamez84 23:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


    [edit] Helping out with the Unassessed Wikipedia Biographies

    Seeing that you are an active member of the WikiBiography Project, I was wondering if you would help lend a hand in helping us clear out the amount of [unassessed articles] tagged with {{WPBiography}}. Many of them are of stub and start class, but a few are of B or A caliber. Getting a simple assessment rating can help us start moving many of these biographies to a higher quality article. Thank you! --Ozgod 21:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Template:IR-stub

    Hello! You're more of a stub expert, so can you take a look at Template:IR-stub. Seems to be a bit screwed up. There's no category to go with it, so I'm guessing that the stub-sorting wallahs didn't create this one. Delete? Fixup? Ignore? I'll leave the hard decisions to you! Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:43, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] TfD nomination of Template:Infobox England place with UK flag for UK map

    Template:Infobox England place with UK flag for UK map 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. --Pit-yacker 16:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Wikiproject Biography March 2007 Newsletter

    The March 2007 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Mocko13 22:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] WP:SCOWNB WP:SCO etc.

    G'day. I trust the tandem is holding up. I am finally beginning to get my head around the various WP:SCOWNB WP:SCO P:SCO etc pages and I notice lots of duplication e.g. lists of GAs, FAs members on WP:SCOWNB & WP:SCO. Is there a reason for this, or have things just grown and nobody got round to tidying them up? I am resisting the urge to do some re-organising, but is there any useful history or discussion anywhere to be aware of? Ben MacDui (Talk) 20:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

    I will post a few thoughts soon. There was a similar reaction to the idea of pursuing FA status for the Scotland page a while ago. However now that I am older and wiser I can see that just keeping it in one piece is a huge task. Apart from some arcane purist view, can you think of any practical advantages in not having the Scotland article permanantly semi-protected? There have been hundreds of edits in the last few months, most of them Anon IPs making edits which are then reverted. Ben MacDui (Talk) 19:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

    On reflection, I just did some pruning. I'll have another go later. Ben MacDui (Talk) 22:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

    Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/i/User_talk%7EMais_oui_33b0.html"