User talk:Gnevin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive

Archives
1|2|3


Contents

[edit] 2007-2008 Cork players strike

Updated DYK query On 14 February 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 2007-2008 Cork players strike, 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.

--BorgQueen (talk) 14:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Charles Stewart and Wiki violations

Hi there, I notice you recently left a message on Charles Stewart's Wiki talk page referring to his violation of rules and policy. He has recently summarily deleted content and added a deletion tag to the page about Vitamin S which I created. I'm not entirely sure what to do about this to ensure that the page is not deleted or removed again. It's entirely possible I've gone about the page Vitamin S page creation the wrong way. Would it be possible for you to give me some pointers on how to proceed? Thanks. Dinobass (talk) 09:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your suggestesd category moves

Hi, I just saw that you left a note on my talk page which you then struck out:

What's the process to nominate a category to move , or can you nominate these two Category:Football in the Republic of Ireland to Category:Association football in the Republic of Ireland and Category:Irish police officers Category:Members of Garda Síochána Gnevin (talk) 08:49, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


You're right that the police have been sorted out by subcategorisation, but I think that your edit summary was a bit too pessimistic about the football.

I still think that it would be a good idea to rename the three soccer categories:

The parent category for this lot is Category:Football (soccer) in Europe, so this would both solve the ambiguity problem in Ireland and be consistent with the parent category.

I think it's a reasonable proposal that would stand a good chance of success. Would it be OK with you if I went ahead and made the nomination at WP:CFD? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:45, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[makes furnace noises] S-s-s-s-S-s-s-s... [scares Gnevin out of bed] --Snuffleupagus 18:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Moves

I've sorted out the Leinster Senior League mess, but the stuff in brackets shouldn't be capitalised unless it's a proper noun (e.g. Leinster Senior League (association football) rather than Leinster Senior League (Association football)). Regards, пﮟოьεԻ 57 16:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Foreign relations of Russia

You are probably going to get your way anway on this, but I think that you should contribute to the dicussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject International relations before we finalize the change to that template. Kevlar67 (talk) 22:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:Charles Stewart

Thanks, I have already blocked this user for abuse of other editors and subversion of process. Do you want me to refactor the comments at WP:ITN? --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 20:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:GAA

You said on my talk page;

Hi you may be interested in having a look at WP:GAA Gnevin (talk) 00:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Hi, thanks for the message and the link to WP:GAA Could you explain how to insert the templates provided so that they appear at the side rather than top or bottom of the page please??

Tameamseo (talk) 02:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Thanks, I think I know what I was doing wrong now.
  • Sorry Gnevin, but what did you mean to say when you wrote "Can you have a look at Hi can you have a look at" on my talk page??Tameamseo (talk) 23:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
  • No problem, I'll try to go over the template over the next few days.Tameamseo (talk) 00:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unionist Gaelic Football

Hi, there is no reference, I removed the Unionist bit before, it is subtly incorrect. Ulster Unionists would refer to Gaelic football as Gaelic football, perhaps Gaelic, but it would be easy to say that people of the protestant background by and large "never refer to Gaelic football" full stop. If you live in politically strong protestant areas, you never see gaelic football as opposed to refering to it, even out in the sticks. Imagine guarding the pitch all week just for the match on Sunday. You would soon have your eyes on a pitch where no kids would see it or youd have red hands painted on it and whatever else you can think of (even with peace some kids would probably want a picture of a big red hand on it or what ever else they could put on it).
ThisMunkey (talk) 09:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kerry GAA

Hi can you have a look at Kerry clubs and make any changes needed.Also do you know where Churchill GAA and Cromane GAA play

  • Hi, I'll have a look at it later this week, probably tomorrow or Thursday.
  • Upcoming fixtures for Cromane: |
  • Munster Junior 'B' Championship: |
  • Final: Sunday, March 9th; Cromane V Oliver Plunketts (Cork) |
  • Mid-Kerry League: |
  • Rd.4: Cromane V Laune Rangers |
  • Rd.5: Cromane V Keel |
  • County League: |
  • Rd.1: Sunday, March 23rd; Cromane V St.Pats |
  • Rd.2: Sunday, March 30th; Ballydonoghue V Cromane |
  • Rd.3: Sunday, April 6th; Cromane V Cordal |
  • Rd.4: Sunday, April 20th; Glenbeigh/Glencar V Cromane |
  • Rd.5: Sunday, May 11th; Na Gaeil V Cromane |
  • Rd.6: Sunday, June 8th; Cromane V Brosna |
  • Rd.7: Sunday, June 22nd; Cromane V Beaufort |
  • Rd.8: Sunday, July 12th; Valentia V Cromane |
  • Rd.9: Sunday, July 27th; Cromane V Firies |
  • Rd.10: Sunday, August 31st; Moyvane V Cromane |
  • Rd.11: Sunday, September 7th; Cromane V Scartaglin |
  • Junior County Championship: |
  • Rd.1: Cromane V St.Pats
  • I'll have to contact Churchill GAA for Their 2008 fixtures.

--Jorgenpfhartogs (talk) 23:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Cromane are Mid Kerry. Churchill are Mid Kerry too but have played as individual club, but they are Mid Kerry as far as I know. --Jorgenpfhartogs (talk) 23:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Will do! Will do!Friends in Kerry already gave me a few pointers on things I should edit so I'll do so in the coming weeks. Things is they all know their own club best and expect me to know everything about every club in every county. It's great for me as well though because I can get some extra knowledge this way as well. --Jorgenpfhartogs (talk) 00:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm actually not born in Kerry, butt have the dubious honour of being the biggest Flemish Kerry-fan ever. I'll contact other Kerry-fans as well for the info I don't hvae. United we stand. --Jorgenpfhartogs (talk) 13:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GAA Player Infobox

Hi Gnevin. Having a look at the GAA player infobox, I thought it looks quite dated and hasn't been updated in quite some time. I'm after creating a new one based on a soccer players infobox. Here's it is demonstrated on Dan Shanahan page. I personally think it looks better, allows for adjusted picture size (much better fit overall) and a few other things such as date of death and place of death and teams managed. Other items would be quite easy to add. Another feature is that any parameter which is omitted will not show up in this template, making for a cleaner template. Even if this isn't going to replace the old one, I'd hope to replace all Waterford GAA players at least and to use it for all future article I'd write if that's ok. Thanks for your time. Template location: Template:Infobox hurler ManfromDelmonte (talk) 01:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I'll drop a line where you said and write up code for potential changes. I dunno about you but I think it would look better if the type face font was reduced in size and the ugly grey shading was removed from around the photo ? ManfromDelmonte (talk) 20:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the grey shading around the photo by the way. I've been trying for a while but I can't seem to correct the template how the blue boxes aren't extending completely to the right. Any idea why ? ManfromDelmonte (talk) 13:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, was coming up weird for me but seems to be fine now. IE update or something. ManfromDelmonte (talk) 18:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree it looks a bit bland, although having grey shading just around the photo looked odd. How about a very light shade of grey to fill the entire infobox ? I've tried a few colours there but couldn't get anything that looked quite right. ManfromDelmonte (talk) 11:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Category alphabetical order

Hi, I wsa just noticing that in Category:Kerry Gaelic footballers, players such as Tommy Walsh and Paul O'Connor have appeared under 'T' and 'P' respectively, rather than 'W' and 'O'. How should that be fixed?Tameamseo (talk) 00:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your help.Tameamseo (talk) 00:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Place of birth and Lderry

The whole Londonderry thing is such bull****, especially for Derry GAA players. The compromise is little more than a farce, it gives no room for flexibility, despite wiki guidelines saying compromises should give scope for flexibility. The city and county are both called Derry by the vast majority of residents and I believe theres some wiki conventions on this somewhere as well. Alas thats a debate for another time. I agree with you that maybe place of birth needs to be added, so fair enough run the AWB. Don't feel theres any need to to add to opening line of article as well the infobox though, doesn't say the place of birth in most GAA's player's opening line. Up to yourself though.

Sorry for the late reply by the way. Derry Boi (talk) 17:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok that's fair enough. Derry Boi (talk) 11:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MV Kerlogue

Your interest in MV Kerlogue is appreciated. If you are in Dublin and are interested Cormac Lowth, artist and historian, will talk on "Maritime Art around Dublin Bay" 8pm Thursday 20 March 2008 at Stella Maris, Seaman’s Club, Beresford Place, Dublin 1 ClemMcGann (talk) 21:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A mis-spelling?

Did you really intend to create the article Games Administion Committee under that title? It looks to me like typo for "Games Administration Committee",

I get 1370 ghits for "Games Administration Committee" GAA -wikipedia, but only 1 ghit for "Games Administion Committee" GAA -wikipedia, and even that turns out to be wikipedia mirror.

I haven't moved the article, but it looks to me like should be moved. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Moved that , thanks for pointing that out Gnevin (talk) 16:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy of Billy Sheehan

Hi Gnevin. A7 applies to articles about a person where the article does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. I listed the article for speedy because Billy Sheehan falls into that category. I'll remove the speedy based on WP:Athlete, and I'll replace with a tag looking for extra references for verification. Bardcom (talk) 00:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Irish FAs

I fail to understand why you added a resolved tag to a four month old discussion I started about Irish Featured articles, because nothing has been done that I know of. Nor have I seen anything about IFAs being sorted, though what that has to do with encouraging people to get involved with existing and possible future Irish FAs, I don't know. It seems that few, if any, Irish editors are even interested in making, or keeping, any Irish articles as FAs. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 15:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

In fact I see you adding several of these resolved tags to old discussions. Why not archive the discussions instead? ww2censor (talk) 15:38, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I actually think it would be better to archive older stale discussions and possibly start tagging those newer discussions that remain and are not several month old. (BTW, I respond where I first post - you must have missed my note at the top of my talk page.) Cheers ww2censor (talk) 15:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Skipped right to the bottom of you talk page to reply , no harm foul as the man says.Its done now,archive if you wish its all the same to me. Gnevin (talk) 15:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually there is a floating box at the bottom too! No problem when it's short, but ongoing discussions across talk pages is a PITA. So let's do some archiving. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 16:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox GAA player

Hi Gnevin, I'm just wondering if there's a way of using a different sized image for different individual players in the {{Infobox GAA player}} from the default 250px one. And if so how do you do it? 250px seems to ruin the quality of some pictures (e.g. Paddy Bradley). Thanks Derry Boi (talk) 18:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Just thinking as well, maybe you could put a little note in the " club / inter-county appearances and scores correct as of x" bit at the bottom something about how it's only Championship games that go towards the app and scores. Tried to do it myself, but don't really have a clue about the code and how to get the word Championship to link to the hurling or football AI, depending on the specific player's sport. Or how to get Championship link to the player's respective county championship. (If you know what I'm on about, I barely know myself). Derry Boi (talk) 01:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

On the subject of the infoboxes, is it really necessary for local club years and club appearances to be visible in the final article even when, as in the vast majority of cases, they aren't filled in? It doesn't look that good when this heading with a blank space is visible in almost all the GAA player articles.Tameamseo (talk) 17:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting that!Tameamseo (talk) 21:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for sorting that out. Derry Boi (talk) 11:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Christy Ring

FYI: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Ireland/Assessment#Christy_Ring. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] St. -> Saint

You seem to be moving rather a lot of club articles to rather strangely named articles. I cannot find any of the clubs referred to as Saint .... anywhere outside of WP. Is there a reason for these changes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crispness (talk • contribs) 14:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

If it is necessary, couldn't it be done within the text? St Vincents GAA is the common name. It doesn't need to be expanded anywhere else - county board, club website, newspaper reports. I would interpret the naming conventions for common names and abbreviations to say that St. is preferred because it is the most common and in fact almost exclusively used. Crispness (talk) 19:05, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
But without the dot. Wikipedia does "St" rather than "St.". --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] References need reflist

Hi, I just noticed on my watchlist that you had added references to Caltra GAC, which was great work ... but omitted to add a references section with a {{reflist}} tag, which meant that the references didn't appear. I have added it now, but just thought I'd point out the small glitch in your good work :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dooher.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dooher.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WTH?

Why did you just remove a chunk without any real reason?--THUGCHILDz 20:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Dude, I know all about or etc. you don't have to tell me anything about that. But What do you not understand about the list that it reflects the list above with the explanation where things a sourced and cited! STOP REMOVING THINGS JUST BECAUSE.--THUGCHILDz 20:57, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Flags

And why are you adding it back? Recognition is already covered - why does it have to be duplicated? The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 20:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

The first sentence of that very same section. [1] "When a flag icon is used for the first time in a list or table, it needs to appear adjacent to its respective country (or province, etc.) name, as not all readers are familiar with all flags". 20:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't think your latest change is very helpful. The visual demonstration of difficulty discerning differences at icon size was useful. I would revert it, except that I do not want to be accused of 3RR violations. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 22:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Seems to me you are just trying to make a WP:POINT. The two are not the same. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 00:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lorrha-Dorrha GAA

I'd appreciate a view on whether this club is truly notable, per WP:ATHLETE. I know nothing about the sport, but it seems to me that Tipperary GAA is certainly notable, but a club at this lower level is not. Like I said, let me know. Ta. --Dweller (talk) 13:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Is it a fully professional league? (I presume Tipperary play in a fully professional league) --Dweller (talk) 16:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm. So the top level is amateur? Makes it difficult to establish just how notable the lower level really is. --Dweller (talk) 16:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Image:Sam Maguire Cup.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Sam Maguire Cup.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [2], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:

  • state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
  • add the relevant copyright tag.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Polly (Parrot) 02:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Image:Samlifted.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Samlifted.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [3], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:

  • state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
  • add the relevant copyright tag.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Polly (Parrot) 02:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Advice

I advice you regarding edit warring of user:THUGCHILDz in list of sports popularity by country ex -national sport- during 5 months: this is an old warning. I suggest a long block for him. Regards. Nemo, 1 May 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.84.15 (talk) 12:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm only a user I can't block anymoreGnevin (talk) 12:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure, but you can solicit an admin because THUGCHILDz is in violation of wiki policy. Regards. Nemo, 1 May 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.84.15 (talk) 12:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I will wait and see how my page move goes down ,if their is a problem with that i will consider asking an admin for a 3rd opinion Gnevin (talk) 12:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, but evidence is this: THUGCHILDz is ever POV and not a collaborator of this project. Regards. Nemo, 1 May 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.84.15 (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I will keep an eye out but I like to WP:AGF Gnevin (talk) 13:04, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Image:Samlifted.jpg

With all due respect, 4 minutes was probably too long. There was nothing you could do to resolve the issue of the copyright tag. It is against copyright laws for Wikipedia to host images that are not properly license, let alone images that bear a different license than the one the copyright holder placed on his image. Any image that is a violation of copyright law should be immediately deleted from Wikipedia. It is not a question of letting the uploader fix something, the expectation is that it should be properly licensed at the time of uploading, not a couple years after. Another fact is that the photo in question cannot be used on Wikipedia with the license it has. If it was simply a question of what the proper license is, and the image was free to host on Wikipedia, than of course I wouldn't have deleted the image, I would've just fixed it. In the future, if you don't want your photos to be deleted, make sure that the photos can be used on Wikipedia, and make sure that you mark said photo with the correct license. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 18:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I am not questioning whether or not you uploaded the image in good faith or not, it is obvious that you did. I have a FLickr account and understand people change their license on photos all the time. But if there is no proof that the image was licensed under said license, that we have to assume that the license that is accessible (i.e. the most current) is the license the image is and has always been under. If you can show me proof that the said image was under the license that you put on the image when it was uploaded, then I will gladly restore the image for you, but if there is no proof we must delete the image under our image policy. Sorry if I sounded rude, but the sarcastic tone in your first post kinda turned me off from being my usually cheery self. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 23:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I just realized your note on the village pump, heres the url [4]. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 04:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Your welcome, and don't worry about it. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 21:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Image:Semplestadium.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Semplestadium.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Polly (Parrot) 22:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Image:Tyroneandkerryflags.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Tyroneandkerryflags.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Polly (Parrot) 23:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Navboxes template

I like the {{Navboxes}} template you created. Can you add a default title to it? Like the one I suggested at the pump? "Quick links to related articles" Unless you can think of one better. Alaney2k (talk) 18:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] National sport

See also User talk:Anthony Appleyard#Another disruptive page move.

Just because it was not discussed does not give you the right to perform the changes unilaterally. Leave the page be until you get consensus (one person is not a consensus, despite lack of discussion).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Says it all , moving the page. suggest you and admin follow policy . instead try to bully me Gnevin (talk) 22:26, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
No one agreed with you either. You've had three separate administrators undo your changes. Leave the article as it is, or you may face a block.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Also, there was no objection because there was no one else who saw the comment. Obviously, people disagree with the changes, which is why four separate users have opposed your changes and undone them.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

This is approaching the 3RR (Wikipedia:Three-revert rule) stage. Leave this alone. (I am an administrator.) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

If you revert the page one more time, we will seek a block (I am an administrator as well, but because I am involved, I will not perform the block).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

JForget 22:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


Why am i blocked for suggesting a move , building a Wikipedia:Consensus and moving the page and the admin decides s/he doesnt like the move so ignores policy ? Gnevin (talk) 22:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Gnevin, no reply is not consensus, as several have already explained to you. You had no support and met with considerable opposition. Edit warring is not productive. KillerChihuahua?!? 22:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
You did not build a consensus, Gnevin. You suggested it, and no one responded. When you performed the actions, someone disagreed after discovering it, requested that it be undone, which it was done by an administrator. You have since been repeatedly making the changes. A consensus is a general agreement. No one responding is not a general agreement. You have had five different users respond to your changes such that they disagreed with them. This means you did not have consensus. If I had not been as involved as I had, you would have been blocked for more than 12 hours. Please use this time to read over Wikipedia:Consensus, instead of blindly citing it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

No objection is Wikipedia:Consensus and is has been since i joined wiki if no one objects it's considered no objection surprise , surprise .I gave a week for objections no one did, I followed policy the deletion admin didn't Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Requesting uncontroversial moves . The person who objected should of gone to wp requested move instead of ingoring policy and having an admin ignore policy, going to admin is not following policy its ingoring consensus ,if they had a problem with the move wp request move is availible to them not crying to a soft touch admin who decide Wikipedia:Consensus doesnt apply Gnevin (talk) 22:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requested moves only applies when you not good friends with an admin , is it? I followed policy ! the admin did not !Gnevin (talk) 22:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Pay close attention: when you suggested teh move, no one responded. Silence usually indicates consent, so you were ok to move. It might have been better if you'd posted on Requested moves, in order to get more feedback, but no big deal. The problem came when you moved, and there was a LOT of opposition. At that point it was clear you did not have consensus, you did not have support, in fact you were against consensus in your desired move. Do you see where that happened? 5 ppl saying No, Gnevin saying Yes, guess who is going against consensus? KillerChihuahua?!? 22:50, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict)(x2) Consensus cannot be formed without discussion. If no discussion takes place, no consensus has formed - it's very likely nobody else noticed the fact that you were proposing a page move. As pointed out, if you start getting reverted, you need to discuss with others before getting into an edit war. Chances are you (or they) missed something, and that needs to be worked out before things get disruptive. Please also stop accusing others of not following policy - assumptions of bad faith don't help the situation at all. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

But discussion was had, no one objected so i formed the consensuses. no discussion means an objection to approval would be needed to move a page which Wikipedia:Requested moves does not state Gnevin (talk) 22:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

It is becoming really clear that you do not understand consensus. You cannot "form consensus" all by yourself. Consensus means everyone agrees, more or less. We're a little loose with the terminology here on wikipedia, but if there are five people opposing you, and you are all alone in your view, they have consensus, you do not. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
If no one ever objects no consensus will ever be formed ? yes? Gnevin (talk) 23:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
No, if no one objects, no one objects... it isn't consensus unless people discuss and agree. In practice, what happens when no one objects is we say it "usually implies consent" so you can take it that consensus is at least usually not against you if you get no objection - but in this case it seems clear that no one noticed your post suggesting the move, because once you moved the article there was a lot of response, and it was all against the move. Once the first person objected to the move, you should have discussed it with them - not edit warred. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
If you get reverted, stop and talk it over because someone's missing something somewhere
If you get reverted, stop and talk it over because someone's missing something somewhere
(edit conflict)(x3) Ok. Going back to WP:Consensus here. Consensus works like this (follow along with the flowchart at right). You suggest an edit. Nobody objects, so you go ahead and make the edit. No problems yet. But someone reverts your edit. You don't agree with it, so we go up to the "Discuss ideas for improving the page box." Note that the arrow does not go straight back to "Make an edit." If someone reverts you, you have to stop and talk it over because someone's missing something somewhere - could be you, could be them, we don't really know, but that's why we talk it over - to figure out who, what, and where. Once we have figured those three things out, and come to a common agreement, then we make a new edit to reflect that change in opinion. And repeat as needed, taking care to discuss each time, using dispute resolution if necessary. Do you see what we're getting at now? Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
But it's ok for an admin to use thier powers to delete a page to move a page [5] instead of going to Wikipedia:Requested moves ? Gnevin (talk) 23:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes. An administrator is chosen because they understand when they can and cannot do such things. There is some room for disagreement, but generally speaking this is not controversial. An editor requested an admin move the page back to the original location because they disagreed with your move, which had no discussion, and certainly did not have a consensus of editors. The admin moved the page back, effectively restoring the last known consensus. Do you understand what I'm saying, or do I need to clarify anything? 23:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
And why didn't the admin point the user to [Wikipedia:Requested moves]] and follow policy and keep everyone happy? Gnevin (talk) 23:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Because your move was the one which was controversial. You were the one who should have been pointed to WP:RM, and you were - but you ignored that and edit warred. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Strange no one objected when i followed policy so i would of assumed the admin overturning a discussed change was was controversial but apparently the admin's are above the law ,go to know, why should i point to WP:RM when is discussed on the talk page as per . There is no obligation to list such move requests here; discussions of page moves can always be carried out at the article's talk page without adding an entry. This page may be seen as a place to advertise move debates that would benefit from wider community input, or for users to request assistance from administrators in moving pages. , yes a copy and paste from the policy page. i guess that doesn't apply for some reason? Gnevin (talk) 23:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

(Outdent) There was no discussion. You refer to "a discussed change" but there was no discussion at all. No one noticed your post. No one replied, either for or against the move. When you moved the page, people noticed and objected. This made it clear the move was contested, and you should have placed it on requested moves, per policy. The admin was following policy. You were not. You edit warred and moved against consensus, against multiple admins trying to discuss with you, breaking 3RR, and you persist in accusing the admin who reverted your unsupported move of "ignoring" or "going against" policy; of being "above the law", none of which is true and all of which is rude and accusatory. The admin who reverted your move did not go against any policy. You have broken at least four. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

people noticed and objected. This made it clear the move was contested, and you should have placed it on requested moves, per policy. so go to wp:rm
Can some one unblock me as i wish to discuss the issue raised here at wp:rm and village pump and will not move the page again with out approval ? Gnevin (talk) 23:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
To contest your block, add the text {{unblock|your reason here}} as instructed in the block notice above. KillerChihuahua?!? 00:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Can some one unblock me as i wish to discuss the issue raised here at wp:rm and village pump and will not move the page again with out approval ?"

Decline reason: "A twelve hour block is very reasonable; the discussions you want to have, you can just as easily have tomorrow. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 03:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

[edit] Re: FYI

I'm leaving a comment there. You should be aware that bringing up old issues in a forum where people are unfamiliar with your actions does not mean you an interpret guidelines however you like. This was clearly explained to you, by several different users, more so than was necessary. If you continue to deliberately misinterpret guidelines and policy, you may be blocked again. Hersfold (t/a/c) 14:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Once again, you are deliberately missing the point we're trying to make. Notice that User:Kesh said "If there is an objection, then it becomes necessary to generate a consensus through discussion first." By reverting your move, the admin made an objection. A discussion was needed. Instead, you persisted in a disruptive edit war and refused to constructively participate in discussion. Now, you're posing leading questions in a forum where people don't know the whole situation, and using that as a justification to wave in everyone else's face to say "Hey, you were wrong." The fact is, you're still ignoring what we tried to tell you for hours the other day. I'm tired of explaining it myself, so go ahead and discuss it at WT:CON. However, please be aware that continuing to ignore consensus will lead to further blocks. Hersfold (t/a/c) 14:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok, this is honestly the last time, before I bring someone else in to try and explain this to you, because I've already told you this at least once before.
Wrong. Admins are in no way more important than other editors. They also must respect consensus when it has been formed. However, silence does not necessarily imply a consensus, and it is within the right of any editor to revert you if they contest a change you have made, even if you proposed it previously and got no response. This just shows that no consensus exists and you need to discuss things in order to form one.
When no discussion occurs, no consensus has been formed. You can go ahead and make your change (that's why we have WP:BOLD) but if someone undoes your edit, you must stop then and discuss things before continuing. It's good to go to other forums for other opinions where appropriate, but when doing so you need to make sure you provide all the facts, not just the ones you want people to know.
I really hope you've got it this time, but if not, let me know and I'll ask someone else to try to help you out on your talk page. Hersfold (t/a/c) 14:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
In this case, the administrator was acting on behalf of another regular editor, who requested they revert the move. It is probable the regular user could have done this themselves: see Wikipedia:MOVE#Moving over a redirect. For whatever reason, they didn't, and requested admin help. When administrators try to move a page over a redirect, we get a little warning message to delete the redirect to make way for the move, instead of the process listed at that link. This is considered acceptable and uncontroversial under Criteria for Speedy Deletion G6. In general, it has the same effect as moving a page over a redirect, so admin tools aren't even necessary; they just get used because it makes the software happier. Hersfold (t/a/c) 15:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Navboxes - Brian Cowen

Hi, can you stop putting the Navboxes template at the end of Brian Cowen's article, it does not work. It does not display the succession boxes correctly. I have reverted to using Template groups. Please do not change it again. Snappy56 (talk) 23:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Your Navboxes template seems to reduce the size of the font in the Nav Template. Any idea why? Snappy56 (talk) 09:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

I just wanted to thank you for the third opinion you provided on the flagicon and state seal on Talk:Edelbrock. Aspects (talk) 22:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clean up on the GAA articles, I should probably make an effort to learn to use AWB Fasach Nua (talk) 18:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox GAA player

Hi Gnevin, sorry to bother you, but there seem to be "expression error" problems at Template:Infobox GAA player. Do you think you could fix this? Thanks. Tameamseo (talk) 23:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's just that when I go into Template:Infobox GAA player, the lines after 'Full name' have red writing giving error messages;
  • Date of birth [[ Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "{"]] [[{{{byear}}}]]({{{byear}}}-Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "{"-{{{bday}}})
  • Date of death [[ Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "{"]] [[{{{dyear}}}]] (aged Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "{")
  • Place of birth {{{placeofbirth}}} ,
  • Height {{{feet}}} ft {{{inches}}} in (Expression error: Unexpected < operator m).

Does this not indicate a problem? Tameamseo (talk) 15:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks, sorry for the confusion! :) Tameamseo (talk) 14:31, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Suggestion for you to review

Thanks, I'll have a look and let you know what I think. BanRay 13:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: List of Gaelic games terminology

Thank you for your comment! DellusMaximus (talk) 22:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AWB/B#Duplicate images in image plugin

Hi, could you take a look at instructions here and check if they help? MaxSem(Han shot first!) 16:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stadiums/Stadia

See reply on my talk page. Thanks. --Schcamboaon scéal? 16:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] User:Keedez

This user has vandalised London GAA and Cambridge Parnells. Can you kick the user off Wikipedia, or how does that work?--Gaainfo (talk) 15:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Doireann Ni Bhriain

Hi! I'm dropping a note to all the fairly recent editors of the Irish Wikipedians' Noticeboard.

I have just started writing an article on the journalist Doireann Ni Bhriain and I am calling for interested editors who would like to dig for some more sources on her career, her birthdate, and perhaps to find a usable picture for WP. As of yet, there is no section on her lengthy career with RTE, and that's something I would like to rectify soon. However, what I can find seems to be just a vague overview. I'm American so perhaps I don't know where to look for the best sources on this...this is where you come in! Please contact me if you'd like to help. Mike H. Fierce! 07:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:VPR#Order of precedent

I am renaming your section "order of precedent" to "order of precedence" (as in "The Constitution of the United States takes precedence over all treaties and laws of the United States, as well as all state and local laws.") ("Precedent" would be more appropriate in a sentence such as "there seem to be multiple precedents for the proposition that 'WP:IAR' is invoked only in opposition to 'wikilawyering' in contested cases, rather being used to govern the day-to-day operation of Wikipedia.") Because the "precedence" is a disambiguation page, and "order of precedence" is not germane, I am also un-wiki-linking it. I also refactored your request in other ways.

In addition, I offered a reply of my own. (I should have made it a separate edit, to make it easier for you to undo my refactoring without undoing my reply, but hindsight is 20/20.) 69.140.152.55 (talk) 14:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)