User talk:Gazh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Pow Sows

Ha ... I enjoyed the objection on the grounds that, "It also suggests that Cornish is an ancient English language which of course it is not." With a few more edits like that, we could recruit you into the Wiki Republician Army! --sony-youthpléigh 21:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geordie

Hi Gaz. I removed your reference as the link is supposed to support the statement that a significant number of people in Sunderland take offense at being called "Geordie". A source must be "regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand" (Wikipedia:Reliable sources). The article hardly shows evidence of being an authority on the views of people in Sunderland, especially given the joky nature of it ('don't call us Geordies!'). I don't disagree with what is said (which is why I didn't remove the text), but to improve the article for people reading it (so they know it's coming from a good reliable source), good references are needed. Maybe some local historian or something has something relevent to say that could support this statement? Logoistic 23:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I've had a preliminary glance at the internet and there doesn't seem to be much there. Moreover, this BBC "voices" survey (see here seems to think "Geordie" and North East are one and the same! This article (here) is interesting, and quotes from somebody who seems to have done a bit of research, but again there is no expliclit mention o0f people hating being called a Geordie. Logoistic 11:47, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Braveheart edits

Please, discuss your problems with edits on the Discussion page, and not via the abbreviated format of the edit summary. Clearly, the point is in contention, so it requires discussion. I've reverted it back, and it would be best if it stayed that way until discussion is concluded. The low-grade edit-warring is disruptive. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Invitation to vote

You as someone who participated in the editing of English people article might be interested in taking part in this discussion. Feel free to state your opinion. M.V.E.i. 16:32, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

I know I've done some serious work on the article Mackem my aim is to get it to a Good article status so its something that wikipedia can be proud of, compared to the article Geordie it actually is a lot better in quality and references. The sunder king 14:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes I would consider creating an article on the bridges. After all it is quite notable, go ahead and create it but make sure you put a lot of content in it. Or someone might come along and consider it for deletion. The sunder king 14:50, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok I've done a few edits to the article to improve its quality. I will also stick a bit of history in there aswell, and perhaps upload a logo. The sunder king 10:31, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
There, I've done quite a bit more to it now. What do you think? The sunder king 10:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
added it in about the extention. The sunder king 13:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Okay then I've done some minor edits on that. Its notable enough, but I don't know much about the Crowtree Leisure center. I don't think there's anything else sunderland related to create an article on. --The sunder king 13:40, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
The Bridges one is secure, with 26 million shoppers a year that is notable! it also has a lot of google hits, but I know how many deletionists work. There are a lot of pratts here on wikipedia and I figure that after 3 months, but you have been here longer. The sunder king 13:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wearside

Hey Gaz, thanks for the message. It's pointless speculating as to what people think about their local identity, as you cannot be sure unless you either sources that either survey people on it (such as those taken on County identites in the early 1990s), or have sources that can be resonably assumed to represent this opinion qualitatively (e.g. local history accounts). The fact of the matter is that Wearside centres around Sunderland - but without clear sources defining its boundaries we should not be adding any claims other than this. In any case, my personal experience of growing up here (just outside of Durham) is that we are definantly NOT part of Wearside. We don't get the Sunderland Echo here. The "Durham" News section is likely referring to those areas in the non-metropolitan county of Durham that border the place - such as Seaham - I know the Sunderland Echo sells well there! It's more the Northern Echo in these parts! In any case, I can't easily back this up with sources either (I suppose I could if I really tried - but I just never have the time to go and get some books out on anything like this), so have left it the 'centre around Sunderland' bit! Logoistic 21:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] reply

I have replied to your comment on User talk:El-Nin09/WikiCup. The sunder king 14:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Upper class masturbators

What was that all about? I wish I was upper class, then I might be able to afford my council tax. You have to go a long way back in my family tree to find any titled people... --MacRusgail 16:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC) p.s. Tell Jonah Lomu he's upper class. :)

Don't read too much into that Rus it was a passing comment, i think it depends on the region whether or not Rugby fans/players are voting Conservative or not, certainly in my little part of the world the only people who play or are very interested in Rugby tend to be big-eared blond lads with posh accents. I mean, don't get me wrong, i look for the results of all home nations - but it certainly does not engulf me. Gazh 17:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Canny win for England though, eh ? Gazh 09:19, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] WikiCup

 Note: The WikiWorld Cup has begun, best wishes for the competition. F9T 18:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English and Welsh indpendence user boxes

Hi Gazh, I took them down because I was getting way too much flack (slash personal attacks) from a very small but determined number of editors who were using them as evidence to paint anything I had to say as extremist and politically-motivated trouble making. I was not so much concerned about what these editors had to say, but it was having a negative effect on "by-standers" who got nervous about the whiff of POV from the sh*t that was being thrown at me. It's unfortunate, but it was just getting too great. --sony-youthpléigh 12:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

"... may i ask why it's ok to take away England and leave Scotland?" Beats me too, but it was straight away as soon as the England and Welsh boxes went up that the abuse started. In any case, I think it's implicit (United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland?). --sony-youthpléigh 16:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello Gazh

Hi Gazh, you may be intrested in joining the small wiki I've just set up. Alien research wiki. Basically its just a research project on aliens and there is no limit to what you actually create. The sunder king 14:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Cheers i'll av a gander tonight. Gazh 15:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WPE banners

Hi gaz, There are 257 parishes in Cornwall. Will you be clagg tagging them all? good luck. Talskiddy 21:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I am sorry to inform you but

WikiCup Announcement
You have been eliminated from the WikiCup in the group round. This was worked by the total number of points generated by your edit count and number of unique pages, etc. We hope that you will join us again for another competition
The sunder king 18:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gazh, to some

I have gave a bit away in an edit to you here (included: Sunderland, as in 'to some' (like people in Sunderland)), so we can keep this bit of information up (put a cite source marking there is you want). Being leaving this up will lead to research cues for people to find sources, which will ultimately in due course improve this article.

Regarding the 1973 final. I have seen the original on TV on a couple of occassions and I have heard the commentator who I think was the late Brian Moore- refer to the Sunderland fans as geordies, and I can remember the fans singing Geordies. So I sourced that in good faith. However I'm willing to back down on that, giving you the benefit of the doubt with you saying you have the copy. I'll give you that one. My brain could be being retrospective.

I'll leave that source out for now. Perhaps as a peace offering you can say you have took it out in a neutral fashion on the discussion board?

All the best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.97.69.42 (talk) 18:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hey Gazh

I've just created an article on Monkwearmouth Colliery, have a look and tell me what you think. The sunder king 19:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks really good mate, I'll try and add some bits in the next few days. Gazh 18:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rijk Van Roog‎ hoax

You recently created the article Rijk Van Roog. Could you explain to me on what information you based the article? I'm Dutch, I'm a football lover, but I have never ever heard of this name, even though according to the article he played for the club of the city I live in. Add to that the fact that the surname Van Roog doesn't exist. You appear to be an established and credible editor, but the article you created appears to be nothing but a hoax. AecisBrievenbus 00:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

After some thoughts, I have decided to nominate the article for deletion. You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rijk Van Roog‎. AecisBrievenbus 01:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

You also created English Potato Famine, for which there is no evidence that this existed or is called thus. It is also nominated for deletion. This makes two articles in a row that look remarkably like hoaxes. If this correct, then please consider this as a final warning. Creating more of these nonsense will get you blocked, despite your previous record of good edits. Fram (talk) 11:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

"English Potato Famine" is no hoax (as neither is the Dutch Potato Famine of the same time). Potato famine struck throughout north-western Europe in the mid 1840's. However, in comparison to the Irish experience, the effects elsewhere were to create a food crisis, rarely verging on a true famine. An exception to ex-Ireland Europe are the Scottish Highlands, however, which deserve special treatment as they were particularly harshly struck, and the social/economics effects of the crisis were destroying for the Highlands.
The topic would be better treated as three articles: Irish Potato Famine, Highland Potato Famine, and European Potato Famine. I had proposed to start the latter article before. I suggest that Cornish Potato Famine and English Potato Famine be merged into that, as they stand no realistic chance of becoming more than just stubs and would be better treated in the pan-European context. --sony-youthpléigh 11:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Sony, whenever you're ready to apologise Fram, I'll be right here. Gazh (talk) 12:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Umm, you created one certain hoax (Rijk Van Roog), and one article which is an unattributed copy of Cornish Potato Famine, and which has no indication either inside or outside the article that it reflects an existing subject of historic research (i.e., no one uses the title of your article at all), and you have the guts to expect an apology? No way. 12:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fram (talk • contribs)
And over the head it goes, never mind Fram. Gazh (talk) 13:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
You still haven't explained Rijk Van Roog, Gazh. Why did you create that article? AecisBrievenbus 13:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I would also like you to explain your last post above here, and to explain the creation of those two articles. Fram (talk) 15:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, okay, calm down - heaven's above! It's really not that important. If Rijk Van Roog is a hoax then big deal. Delete it and get it over with. Who cares why Gazh created it. He did. So what? Delete it. --sony-youthpléigh 15:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Fram stop playin th' dictayta, stop playin mr reet-wing, there's nee secret ansa, dinnit werry if ye dinnit undastand, ye not meant te ennyway. Et's above en beyon many not frem these lans. ;) Gazh (talk) 07:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gavin Donoghue

Hi, i've added a infobox and a reference, so far and i'll be trying to do more, and i'll have a go at the Richard Ord page.--Sunderland06 17:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, do you thinks i should put Gavin Donoghue in for a peer review.--Sunderland06 18:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Gan on then i'll put it in for a peer review.Thanks.--Sunderland06 14:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, do you know where you got the information on Gavin Donoghue, especially the part where it says about DDSL, as i need it for citations.Thanks.--Sunderland06 (talk) 19:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
We'll probablys have to skip that bit of the article then, the DDSL part.Thanks.Sunderland06 11:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] invatation

for a fellow mackem to join the new sunderland football wiki. 217.43.59.195 (talk) 18:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merry Christmas

And a very merry christmas to you, and indeed a very happy new year. Sunderland06  19:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gavin Donoghue

Hi can you tell me where you got the info about Gavin on this section here, and give me the website because they need references. And do you have a reference for this bit, Donoghue combines very good aerial ability with a classic approach to playing central defence. His reading, patience, and excellent long range passing being his best assets., or is it just your own view.  Sunderland06  17:58, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

All i need is for you to give me the name of the aricle about Gavin Donoghue and what date it was released, that is if you can find the programme, is there a quicker way i can get in touch with you.  Sunderland06  21:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Have you got MSN so i can contact you easier.  Sunderland06  22:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
No i haven't mate, i'd give you my email but i'm sketchy about posting it here, if you want to give me yours i'll send you an email though, unless you can think or summat else. Gazh (talk) 14:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

DUNNIT

I know i've left you an email, but i didn't know where you would get through to me quicker, so i just want to ask if you have that programme yet. Thanks.  Sunderland06  13:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Ghost (producer)

An editor has nominated Ghost (producer), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghost (producer) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 16:44, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Dubbledge

An editor has nominated Dubbledge, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dubbledge and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 16:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE:

I've got decent knowledge about certain things, but I wouldn't go any further than that. Fire away though. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I think I get what you're after, and I'll respond as best I can.

  • British would be south of the Forth, Pictish north of the Forth. All Celtic elements identified in the Pictish area that are different from Gaelic are almost exactly like British; therefore, Pictish is a form of British. The only period we have good info for before the 12th century is the late 600s/early 700s; in this era, in the age of Adomnan and Bede, the Scoti and the Picti are said to be divided from each other by the Dorsum Britanniae, a Latin translation of Druim Alban ("Spine of Britain", "Spine of Scotland", i.e. the mountains between Argyll/Wester Ross and the rest of Scotland). Thus, it is assumed, Gaelic was west of that, Pictish east of it, and British south of it. English is an intrusive element that comes in in the 7th century; its spread can't be definitely traced, but by the 12th century it was the language of the modern Lothian and Scottish Borders council areas. In the 12th century, Gaelic was the language of between 80% and 90% of the Scottish landmass, spoken north of the Forth (with the exception of the Caithness-Sutherland coast), west of the Nith and Clyde (essentially Dumfries and Galloway, Ayrshire and Dumbartonshire); British may have surived in Nithsdale, Annandale, Clydesale, and Teviotdale, but English and Gaelic were spoken in these areas too. It's very important to remember the dates c. 700 and c. 1100, because anything anyone claims about any date before or between is just guessing.
  • Gaelic, Pictish and British are all Celtic and may not have been meaningfully different on the ground by 700, we don't have enough evidence. One recent (re-)suggestion about Pictish is that it just became identified as Gaelic between 700 and 1100 by a process of dialect reconvergence, like Scots with English was the cited parallel. At any rate, it is very misleading to see Scotland divided cooly between four languages. Only one language - English - was completely different.
  • Eyemouth, it is true, has no attested history of Gaelic speech, and almost certainly it was never spoken there except by a few immigrant landlords (and even that's prolly not the case because it lies in comital, not royal, territory). It lies just a few miles from Bamburgh, the centre of the earldom of Northumbria/Northumberland/Bernicia, and has been English for at least 1300 years since the Britons there were acculturated/conquered/whatever. Until the Wars of Independence, the inhabitants of Eyemouth would have thought it odd to be called "Scottish", and would happily and innocently referred to themselves as "English". But that area has been part of Scotland for 8 centuries, so the history of the exact area is to some extent secondary to the nation as a whole; people move around after all.
  • Scotland was never formed compositionally. The Kingdom of Alba took over the English speaking area long after its identity and ideology were established; Scotland actually means "Gaelic-speaking territory"; this might seem odd, but you'll understand if you know that "Scotland" is an English exonym and referred to the land north of the Forth until the end of the 13th century, which was entirely Gaelic speaking as far as the post-900 English were concerned. That's one of the reasons many Scots identify with Gaelic; the other is that since the 14th century after the processes of integration of conquered English and immigrant English (north of the Forth, etc), and about the time English became the main language of the Lowlands and Scottish government, Scots just assumed that they used to speak Gaelic. No-one in the 15th century would have understood either that the south-east wasn't always part of Scotland. So until the rise of Teutonism in the 18th century, that was the way things were seen. Thirdly, Gaelic is Scotland's only surviving non-English language, so it is the only real source of Scottish linguistic distinctiveness. No-one except a few intellectuals view Scots that way; that's just the way it is.

Anyways, hope that helps. Can't continue this, because I'm going away for a while, but I'll be back at some point. Regards,Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Sorry to keep bugging you about this but have you found the programme with the info for Gavin Donoghue, I have just created the Donoghue article in my userspace here. Thanks.  Sunderland06  23:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

No mate, i can't find it. sorry. Gazh (talk) 06:21, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Damn, can you remember the date, opponent, anything will do. Sunderland06 (talk) 09:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Consett or Bishop Auckland i think. Gazh (talk) 11:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure you can't get any more info, and was that a reserve match? Sunderland06 (talk) 04:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Pre season friendly, mostly reserves played i think. Gazh (talk) 12:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] May 2008

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Berwick-upon-Tweed. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Please STOP removing sourced material without consensus. Take it to the talk page if you disagree with it. --Rodhullandemu 20:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

See your talkpage. Gazh (talk) 20:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
"Oops." - I was looking at the latest changes to Berwick-upon-Tweed and accidentally hit the revert button when I meant to hit ...? (Actually I have no idea why I clicked the mouse.) Sorry about that. I've restored the change. -- Tcncv (talk) 21:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)