User talk:Major Bonkers
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Major Bonkers, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
Here are a few more good links to help you get started:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Kukini 15:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Western betrayal
Please do not get too discouraged. This page was most likely created as a battlefield and for propaganda purposes, not in good faith (although the term itself does exist and was used, at least among Czechs).
Around hudredth of pages on Wikipedia suffer similarly. For most of others referenced and factual information has chance to stay intact. Pavel Vozenilek 23:12, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has several warriors (Molobo, SpaceCadet) and they can get /very/ aggressive. Attempts to solve this were done (e.g. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Molobo) but it is very slow process.
- I am here to write articles related to Czechs and Czech Republic. Cleanup after vandals and spammers already takes too much of my attention. Getting head on with the warriors is the last thing I would spent my time on.
- Wikipedia has certain group dynamic and that changes very slowly. If I can recommend: do not get involved in the very disputed topics at this moment. Having longer edit history adds to one credibility (I know how wrong it is) and makes one more resistant to attacks. Pavel Vozenilek 01:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- PS: please use edit summary for every edit. It helps people who are on watch for vandalim. TIA
[edit] Your predelictions
You support an independent Palestine but do not mention a state for the Kurds? Kittybrewster 22:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- By and large, I disapprove of people killing Britishers. See Siege of Kut. Major Bonkers
[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diarmuid O'Neill
Please vote. - Kittybrewster 22:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hello
You seem like a decent chap. Just love your user name. David Lauder 18:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. I do my best to do the right thing. God knows it seems hard sometimes!--Major Bonkers 19:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- What Mr Lauder said. Plus, if you're a friend of Kittybrewster, you must be nice, even if you are (like me) a lawyer too. So howdy! Laura1822 15:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Thank you for yours, too!--Major Bonkers 09:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Well, I'm currently not practicing, so maybe that's why he likes me! Then again, everyone seems to like most of the individual lawyers they know, yet dislike the profession as a whole. Laura1822 15:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- I like Major Bonkers too (and his girlfriend). But he may well end up on the tumbrill. - Kittybrewster 17:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Wife, now. I expect I'm for the block after what I've posted on your talk page!--Major Bonkers 19:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Congratulations and many thanks. Which reminds me that I want to fax or email you an extract from a book. So much to do, so little time. - Kittybrewster 23:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please improve Arbuthnot Road. - Kittybrewster 11:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Congratulations and many thanks. Which reminds me that I want to fax or email you an extract from a book. So much to do, so little time. - Kittybrewster 23:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Wife, now. I expect I'm for the block after what I've posted on your talk page!--Major Bonkers 19:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- I like Major Bonkers too (and his girlfriend). But he may well end up on the tumbrill. - Kittybrewster 17:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I'm currently not practicing, so maybe that's why he likes me! Then again, everyone seems to like most of the individual lawyers they know, yet dislike the profession as a whole. Laura1822 15:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] WP:NOT
Your references to English law, while cute, don't actually apply here. Please have a look at our policies, notably What Wikipedia is not (among other things, it's not a democracy), before commenting on matters of policy. Thanks. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- I still think that you're wrong, but you don't seem very inclined to listen. Thanks.--Major Bonkers 19:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's a disappointing attitude for you to take. If you think that I'm wrong, try to explain why I might be wrong, using Wikipedia policies and guidelines to back up your argument. Using English law, for example, is meaningless, as those aren't the rules by which the project polices itself internally (and, for that matter, I'm not in England anyway). | Mr. Darcy talk 19:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think there's much point in continuing this dialogue. I refer you to my original cute posting. If you exercise power arbitrarily, you'll stand to be accused of bullying.--Major Bonkers 10:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, there's been no dialogue, since you refuse to discuss the matter, despite my request that you explain to me which Wikipedia policies and/or guidelines support your position. Good day. | Mr. Darcy talk 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- I find it interesting that Darcy is the only person other than the nominator who has voted to delete Arbuthnot Road. If I were paranoid, which I am not, I might suspect his motives. - Kittybrewster 10:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- The trouble with him is that he's hiding behind the skirts of Wikipedia policy - see his first posting on this subject, above. If one turns up the documents he cites, which are written in general rather than specific terms, there is nothing in them that either prohibits or (more importantly) allows him to act in the biased ways that he does. It's all very well saying that Wikipedia is not a democracy, but that doesn't mean that it's a fascist dictatorship. I have set out twice now, once on Kittybrewster's talk page and once by reference to natural justice why any normal person would find his conduct objectionable but it's like banging one's head against a brick wall: the only response is 'show me where I'm wrong', rather than showing us where he is right and attemptifying to justify his conduct: see ignoratio elenchi.--Major Bonkers 11:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- I find it interesting that Darcy is the only person other than the nominator who has voted to delete Arbuthnot Road. If I were paranoid, which I am not, I might suspect his motives. - Kittybrewster 10:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, there's been no dialogue, since you refuse to discuss the matter, despite my request that you explain to me which Wikipedia policies and/or guidelines support your position. Good day. | Mr. Darcy talk 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think there's much point in continuing this dialogue. I refer you to my original cute posting. If you exercise power arbitrarily, you'll stand to be accused of bullying.--Major Bonkers 10:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's a disappointing attitude for you to take. If you think that I'm wrong, try to explain why I might be wrong, using Wikipedia policies and guidelines to back up your argument. Using English law, for example, is meaningless, as those aren't the rules by which the project polices itself internally (and, for that matter, I'm not in England anyway). | Mr. Darcy talk 19:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Yours
Have answered you on my Talk Page. David Lauder 18:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Raymond Gilmour
- See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raymond Gilmour- another non notable IRA member up for deletion Astrotrain 19:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- You're not going to succeed with these people. There are more of them who are active in these pursuits and who are clearly using every Wikipedia guideline they can possibly locate for their ends. I think the best we can do is stick to academic issues and edits otherwise it will be endless bickering. David Lauder 09:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- There certainly seems to be a lot of rubbish about, David, most of it propagated by Kittybrewster's nemesis and not helped by certain ignorant short planks, but nil desperandum! Thanks for the heads-up, Astrotrain, I had missed this one despite my interest in the subject (as you can see on my User page). We do seem to need that special category of non-notable IRA members that has been mooted in the past.--Major Bonkers 13:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please see the discussion on User talk:Astrotrain. It is clear people of our Ilk are now being targetted for mere discussion and exchange of views. David Lauder 10:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- There certainly seems to be a lot of rubbish about, David, most of it propagated by Kittybrewster's nemesis and not helped by certain ignorant short planks, but nil desperandum! Thanks for the heads-up, Astrotrain, I had missed this one despite my interest in the subject (as you can see on my User page). We do seem to need that special category of non-notable IRA members that has been mooted in the past.--Major Bonkers 13:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] Edit summary
Please put in the edit summary either a summary of your text or paste in the beginning of it. Simply saying "Major Bonkers speaks (again)" doesn't give any helpful information to other editors, as your name will appear automatically by the edit anyway. See Help:Edit summary. Thanks. Tyrenius 19:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Warning
Kindly stop harassment of User:Vintagekits. You have twice removed his comments from another editor's talk page.[1][2] This is completely unacceptable. Furthermore you have labelled them as vandalism. Good faith edits, which these patently are, are never vandalism. This is a final warning to desist from this quite uncivil behaviour. Next time you will be blocked from editing. Tyrenius 02:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's an attempt to inflame a situation which I am attempting to damp down.--Major Bonkers 08:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Referring to a legitimate comment as "vandalism" does not qualify as "attempting to damp down" anything. There is ZERO justification for this behaviour. If you do it again, you'll be blocked. | Mr. Darcy talk 18:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks MB- I agree that his comments were inappropiate- and I think you had justification for removing them. Darcy should really assume good faith rather than agressive warnings. As for Vintagekits, he is now expanding his Anglophobic edit warring on the List of British flags article by refusing to allow the fact that the Northern Ireland flag is used by the Irish Football Association and the NI team at the Commonwealth Games; and reverting my edits on the Sovereignty of the Falkland Islands page. Astrotrain 23:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, all other editors are removing your edits. I refuse to get into edit wars with you and there are plenty of other editors to remove your editorial insertions in that section.--Vintagekits 23:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- I apologise for removing the edits; it was done in good faith as an attempt, as I have explained above, to remove a provocation which seemed to me (obviously incorrectly) to fall within WP:VANDAL. I won't do it again, so I don't need to be threatened. I feel that it is a pity that you haven't troubled yourself to respond to what I wrote, which seems to have fallen by the wayside. Now, I suggest we all repair to Talk:Diarmuid O'Neill. --Major Bonkers 12:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Vintagekits, please do not post on my talk page.--Major Bonkers 14:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- I apologise for removing the edits; it was done in good faith as an attempt, as I have explained above, to remove a provocation which seemed to me (obviously incorrectly) to fall within WP:VANDAL. I won't do it again, so I don't need to be threatened. I feel that it is a pity that you haven't troubled yourself to respond to what I wrote, which seems to have fallen by the wayside. Now, I suggest we all repair to Talk:Diarmuid O'Neill. --Major Bonkers 12:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, all other editors are removing your edits. I refuse to get into edit wars with you and there are plenty of other editors to remove your editorial insertions in that section.--Vintagekits 23:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks MB- I agree that his comments were inappropiate- and I think you had justification for removing them. Darcy should really assume good faith rather than agressive warnings. As for Vintagekits, he is now expanding his Anglophobic edit warring on the List of British flags article by refusing to allow the fact that the Northern Ireland flag is used by the Irish Football Association and the NI team at the Commonwealth Games; and reverting my edits on the Sovereignty of the Falkland Islands page. Astrotrain 23:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Referring to a legitimate comment as "vandalism" does not qualify as "attempting to damp down" anything. There is ZERO justification for this behaviour. If you do it again, you'll be blocked. | Mr. Darcy talk 18:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually, it is allowed to remove comments; see here. The aggressive MrDarcy might also like to have a look at WP:DBN.--Major Bonkers 12:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WP:NPA
This post[3] is extremely bad form. You have no evidence to suggest it: MrDarcy has blocked Vintagekits on one occasion. Particularly egregious is the suggestion of national prejudice. You might know which nationality someone is, but I don't and I don't suppose MrDarcy does either, and, even if he does, it is not going to be a material fact. Please WP:AGF, or, as above, the tumbril awaits. Tyrenius 23:44, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Józef Czapski
Hello there - and thanks for the article. Czapski's been on my to-do list for ages now (ever since we started the article on Katyn massacre some 3 years ago)... Anyway, I see you've read the Inhumane land. Too bad so few of his works were translated to English, the guy had great style, completely 19th centurish. I remember a lengthy documentary with an interview with Czapski, aired some 5 years ago. He was like a guest from the past millenia, a descendant of a completely different epoch. Just imagine an old man, sitting in a small flat and telling stories about joking Kerensky or a chatter with the tsar... Anyway, I'll see what I can do with the article, I started with adding some badly-needed references, perhaps more info will come. //Halibutt 14:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] DYK
 |
On 9 March 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Józef Czapski , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
--ALoan (Talk) 11:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Suitability of An Phoblacht citations
The conversation seems to be ongoing with a view to broader participation. I've stated my position clearly and that hasn't changed. Tyrenius 01:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for yours. It just seems a bit pointless that this issue is being allowed to drift. As Stubacca says, it's a test case for citations in IRA articles (and now An Phoblacht itself) and the whole Astrotrain/ Vintagekits thing will continue until this issue is resolved. Oh well! --Major Bonkers 08:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Don't laugh
Your link still doesn't work! David Lauder 17:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
