User talk:Canterbury Tail/Archive 6

Why do you believe..

That adding a link to a free kanji dicitionary is link spamming on a kanji page? I am pretty new to wikipedia posting so maybe you are right but I read all the guidelines and really don't see what is wrong with the link.

I put a lot of work into this dictionary and I believe it to be a valuable resource that a lot of people could benefit form. You made a couple of posts on Japanese-related pages and I would like to invite you to actually take a look:

http://www.taipansoftware.com/en/japanese/dictionary/

It is a powerful Japanese online dictionary with good kanji information. Exactly the kind of dictionary that I always wanted to have but could not find anywhere. Perhaps that's just me. But I believe that there are bunch of people out there who would also appreciate it.

Did you really remove that link because you believe the dictionary is no good? For no one? If that is so then please let me know what is wrong with it so that I can make it better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.119.63.87 (talk) 11:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

There are several reasons. 1) It is not really encyclopaedic content. Wikipedia is not a collection of external links on a topic, not is it a resource for people to use as links to everything, it is an encyclopaedia. See WP:EL. 2) It was spammed over Wikipedia. Adding a link to a site on an appropriate article is one thing, but links need to be appropriate for an article. Adding the link in rapid succession to multiple articles, even ones it does not immediately pertain to, is spamming. 3) I've looked at it and quite frankly it's not a terribly good or useful dictionary to be honest. Ben W Bell talk 13:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Reverting Review

I don't understand what you mean by reverting the review? Have you actually read it? I can send it to you so you can actually see that it is a proper review. I'm really confused as to how you find that a broken link relates to a conflict of interest as you put it. Can you please explain that. It is not my fault that the link on the website doesn't work and I will gladly send you the review if you would like to read it. Please write back soon. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldfool666 (talk • contribs) 09:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

It is a review by, I'm sorry, a non-notable reviewer on a site that hosts user written reviews, not reviews by established professional reviewers. In addition you have said that you wrote it and are trying to post your opinion on the film. Wikipedia is not a place to post your opinion. It is not a soapbox and it is not a site for self-promotion, a clear conflict of interest since you are putting your opinion into an article. Ben W Bell talk 13:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Please Explain

Please explain why you deleted Silpada Designs Jewelry. Silpada Designs Jewelry is a valid wikipedia definition as it the first and largest direct seller of Sterling Silver Jewelry in the United States. This is a noteable fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjessiegarrett (talk • contribs) 17:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the article as it read simply as an advert for the company. Also the article has been deleted several times before for exactly the same reasons. Please read WP:SPAM for more details. Advertising articles or articles that read like advertising can be deleted on sight to prevent Wikipedia from becoming a collection of adverts, for more info read WP:CSD. Ben W Bell talk 22:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for these references. In reviewing them, I read that Wikipedia has three content policies: neutral point of view, verifiability and no original research. This entry qualifies for two of the three content policies as 1)it has been written in a neutral point of view and 2)the fact that it is the first and largest direct seller in the United States can be supported with facts. Knowing that Wikipedia has many direct sales entries, could you please explain why this entry would be deleted knowing the information above? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjessiegarrett (talk • contribs) 16:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The entry was deleted as obvious spam, it had no supporting references other than an unproven claim that it is the largest jewelry direct selling company in the US. Completely unreferenced, deleted as spam several times before, nothing to back up the claims of notability and reads simply as a mention of the company with little to no encyclopaedic content. Wikipedia gets hundreds of articles posted like that every day and the vast majority are deleted as spam, as this one has been several times before. Ben W Bell talk 16:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Lassie2501

Hi Ben. Lassie2501 has requested adoption. While looking at Lassie2501's talkpage I noticed your comments, and so looked at the editing history. It appears to me that your comments to this new user might be considered harsh and inappropriate. New users need guidance not harsh comments. You are no doubt aware of WP:Bite - however you appear not to have applied it in this case. It's also worth reading this: WP:User_pages#Ownership_and_editing_of_pages_in_the_user_space to get a feel for ownership of user pages and that other users may edit other's user pages. You left a comment for the user, and the user responded. I don't see signs of vandalism. We like to encourage and support new users. If you leave harsh warnings for new users who don't fully understand procedure you may be doing more harm than good. It does seem slightly ironic that you are making accusations of the new user of failing to follow procedure while you are failing to follow procedure yourself! However, we all make mistakes - so no big harm has been done. I would however advise that some postings can be quite hurtful and turn people away from contributing. Regards SilkTork *SilkyTalk 13:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

It has been quite some time since dealing with said user but I do vaguely recall there being something more to it. I believe several of her edits were actually deleted by other users, which makes it difficult to trace them, and there were also cases of random vandalising page creations. This comes from a time when I spent most of my time chasing vandals around and I agree in hindsight maybe my comments were a bit harsh. That being said if the user is wanting to become a editor in good standing then good for them and they are welcomed. Ben W Bell talk 13:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: List of tallest buildings in Detroit

Thank you very much! I am hoping to bring the list up to FL standards and nominate it at FLC, maybe even by tomorrow. Cheers, Rai-me 03:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

ulster banner

please do not insert the "ulster banner" flag into articles relating to northern ireland. This is not the official flag of northern ireland and is considered offensive to many. Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.255.207 (talk) 17:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

The Ulster Banner was accidentally reinserted by myself while undoing vandalism. It shouldn't have happened, but unfortunately did. Ben W Bell talk 17:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

interference with Lumen Christi

please stop tour unnecessary interference with the article on Lumen Christi. As a member of the school community i believe the vast majority of pupils in the school believe their school is in COUNTY DERRY, as recognized by the government of the Republic of Ireland. please stop interfering with this article by putting across your own seemingly bigoted views. Blocking me will do no good, i will come back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.255.207 (talk) 17:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I am pleased that you wish to edit Wikipedia, however Wikipedia works on the concept of verifiable material and facts, not on individuals opinion. The fact is that the county is located in Northern Ireland, not just Ireland, and is in County Londonderry. People may like to call the county Derry, but the name of the county is still County Londonderry, and there has never in the history of Ireland been a County Derry. The validity of it being recognised as something contrary to its correct name by a totally separate country has no bearing on any official naming. Also altering references to Northern Ireland to read Ireland is just removing information from the article, it's like changing it to read Europe instead of Northern Ireland, technically correct but not very helpful. Your edits are and were considered vandalism on Wikipedia and your threats to return if blocked and continue vandalising may result in further blocks if deemed necessary. Ben W Bell talk 18:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

In Remembrance...

--nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 01:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

4.130.132.149

Thanks for blocking User:4.130.132.149, which is an IP that vandalized my user and talk page, as well as others. Would you mind semi-protecting User talk:4.130.132.149 as well, as the IP is continuing by vandalizing his/her talk page? NHRHS2010 talk 01:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Already semi-protected. NHRHS2010 talk 01:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

John Duddy

I left a messege on the talk page for you a couple of days ago. regards.--Vintagekits 23:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

feargal sharkey

why have you reverted feargal sharkey's nationality to British? he was born in Ireland and not Britain. how can someone NOT born in the island of Britain be considered British? a citizen of the uk (full name THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND), perhaps, but not British. also please bear in mind that anyone born anywhere on the island of Ireland is entitled to citizenship of the Republic of Ireland, you do not need to be born within the boundaries of the Rep. of Ireland for your nationality to be Irish. there seems to be a pattern emerging with you, constantly changing articles on Ireland to fit your bigoted viewpoints. i would advise you to concentrate on trying to make meaningful contributions to wikipedia, rather than petty ones. this is a very irresponsible attitude for someone in your position on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.222.174 (talk) 14:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

A citizen of the UK is a British citizen, there is no such citizenship as UK, all people of citizenship of the UK are British citizens. May seen bizarre but that's the way it is. Unless he has specifically designated himself as a citizen of the Republic of Ireland, if you're born in Northern Ireland you are British. Ben W Bell talk 14:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

In the six north eastern counties of Ireland, according to the GFA, Irish citizenship, British citizenship or dual citizenship is a birthright. Being born in this part of Ireland doesn't mean someone is automatically British as you assert.Maccabass (talk) 03:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Nope, 'fraid not. I'm afraid the British and Irish governments disagree with you there. See Talk:Northern_Ireland#Citizenship for more details, even the Reform Movements disagrees [1]. Born in NI you are a British citizen just like if you were born in Scotland, England or Wales. You have entitlement to Irish citizenship but you don't automatically get it, but you are a British citizen whether the person likes it or not (and if not they can always revoke it.) Ben W Bell talk 00:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

i.p abuse

Hi, can you block 82.57.155.90 for continued attacks on me on my talkpage? ( User talk:82.57.155.90 ) Thanks, --maxrspct ping me 15:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I have to warn him first, but I'll keep an eye on him. Ben W Bell talk 15:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocked, for now. I've given the account a 1 week for personal attacks. Ben W Bell talk 15:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

City

Many people find it offensive to put Derry as British. Its a Irish city. Princess Pea Face 19:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

It's a UK city in the United Kingdom. You may not like it but that's the fact of the matter. 21:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I am reverting to the previous version of FATLAD and FATDAD for various reasons.

1. The legal resolution of the name dispute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derry-Londonderry_name_dispute) applied only to the city.

2. The main article on Londonderry/Derry identifies the name of the county as Derry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_Londonderry)

3. The article listing the names of the counties identifies the name of the county as Derry (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Counties_of_Northern_Ireland)

4. The majority of the people of Northern Ireland refer to the city and county as Derry (disputable, but read the name dispute article).

5. The official name can be both, as identified by various examples of use of the word "Derry" in unionist organisations.

6. To comply with the NPOV policy of Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Npov).

7. Please provide some official documentation, from Privy Council for example, to back-up legally any reason why Londonderry should be the only name in use. Otherwise, NPOV applies.

Please read as pointed to before, WP:IMOS. Ben W Bell talk 13:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Accepted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.143.202.69 (talk) 14:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Estebo

Well, if you guys would let me finish it it wouldn't be so bad. And how is it a personal attack? What person am I attacking?

The content of the page appears to be a personal attack against the subject of the page. And even if it isn't intended to be the content is not appropriate for inclusion on Wikipedia. Ben W Bell talk 21:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

So what your saying is that estebo is threatning himself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonja+Roman (talk • contribs) 21:51, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The article is not suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia, it appears to be an offensive statement about a completely non-notable person and is ineligible for inclusion. Do not attempt to recreate the article again. Ben W Bell talk 21:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Estebo is a local punk legend in the underground music scene in my area. He is my idol. I was just starting a biographical page on him and that was just my intro...jeez, you act like i'm just messing around on here... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonja+Roman (talk • contribs) 21:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Misread times

I had misread the times on the timestamps, and it looked like the vandalism was much closer in time than it was (I've just added a firefox extension that will help me with that), and about 10 minutes later, my internet went out, so I didn't get your message until just now. It went unprotected about 20m after you asked; and anyone can remove the semi-protect flag once the protection starts. I didn't perceive the edits as quite as good faith as you did; they looked more mischievous to me. Sorry this took me so long to get back to you. --Thespian 04:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Assassin's Creed Wiki

I noticed you edited the Assassin's Creed page. I would like to invite you to come share your knowledge of the game with us at the Assassin's Creed Wiki at Wikia @ http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/ Cheers. -- JoePlay —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.107.177.236 (talk) 00:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Airline Timetables links

Hello, I have linked the timetable section of my site on several airline articles that have been removed. I get a lot of email from people who consider this a valuable source of information. I have these images and would just like to make them available for others to see, how can I make this happen in a way that would conform to the wiki guide line. Keep in mind I don't have make money from my site and have nothing to promote; I just wanted to make these available. If I have a separate domain related to airline timetables would that help conform to wiki guideline?

Thanks for your advice and input.

Chris (irisreg) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irisreg (talk • contribs) 19:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Well you are promoting your own website quite heavily and this is generally regarded as spam. However the main concern with those links is that you are linking to a site that is mainly built upon the display of copyrighted information. You have reproduced old pamphlets and documentation without permission from the airlines concerned and they are all copyrighted information. Wikipedia cannot link to sites that break copyright regulations like that. Ben W Bell talk 19:28, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Air Canada hubs

check this PDF issued by Air Canada [www.aircanada.com/en/about/investor/documents/2006_AIF.pdf] The document states: Domestic Market

   The Canadian domestic market is characterized by a large geographic territory with a limited number of high

density markets accounting for the majority of passenger traffic and revenue. This leads to a concentration of routes in Western and Central Canada around four major hubs: Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Calgary.

According to Air Canada, Calgary is a major hub. Just search the pdf for Calgary.

Regards--Rosetown (talk) 21:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, reference it into the article or post this on the article talk page if you're unsure how to do so. Good catch. Ben W Bell talk 22:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

"Stare a discussion"

Are you sure you're sure there Ben??! (Sarah777 (talk) 00:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC))

Oh - I see, it wasn't my edit commentary in some Carlow article that you are referring to but my comment on your page.....I was curious why you reverted "I have started a discussion" to "I have stared a discussion" - It doesn't seem to make any sense yet another editor made the same revert. What is it to "stare a discussion"? Not familiar with the concept! (Sarah777 (talk) 03:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC))

Japan

Hi! I saw your edit and previous edits on Japan and thought the words, Japanese Koreans, Japanese Chinese and Japanese Fillipinos strange. I think all three are not correct words. As far as I understand, Japanese Korean means a Japanese who took Korean nationality. Think about the word, Japanese American. It means a Japanese who became an American citizen, doesn't it? I take it as the first word shows a person's ethnicity and the second word shows his/her nationality. Am I wrong? If not, I want to change the three words. Please tell me your opnion. Oda Mari (talk) 15:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you are right yes. Seems sensible to me unless there is a specific reason it is the way round that it is. Ben W Bell talk 16:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the opinion. I corrected the words. Best regards. Oda Mari (talk) 17:36, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

French language songs

Hi!
Thank you for your advice. I will try to be careful.
Best regards,
Europe22 (talk) 22:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Asian Paints

This article was unfortunately deleted before this AFD ran its course, so I cannot judge whether its current copy read like an advertisement for the company. But be that as it may, the company is notable enough to have a neutral, sourced article on wikipedia. Here is a short selection of available sources on the company:

• Asian Paints - Company Profile Snapshot, Wright Reports.
• Asian Paints plans largest plant in Haryana, The Economic Times, 30 Jul, 2007
• Forbes: Asia's 200 Best Under A Billion, Forbes, October 19, 2006.

In addition to coverage in the popular media, several management books/articles have specifically analyzed the company, and especially its marketing strategy and the popularity of "Gattu" - its mascot drawn by R. K. Laxman. Some examples:

• Dawar and Frost (1999), "Competing with Giants", Harvard Business review, 77 (2) p. 119. (reports that company controls 40% of home paint market in India in spite of stiff multinational competition)
• Asian Paints - Adding Colours, ICMR Case study.
• Kulwant Singh, Nitin Pangarkar, Loizos Th Heracleous, "Business Strategy in Asia: A Casebook", Academic Foundation, 2004, ISBN 981243724X
• Richard Boulton, Barry D. Libert, Steve M. Samek, "Cracking the Value Code: How Successful Businesses are Creating Wealth in the new economy", HarperCollins, 2002, ISBN 0066620635.
• Ramanuj Majumdar, "Product Management in India", Prentice Hall of India, 2004. ISBN 812031252X
• Sanjay Tiwari, "The (Un)Common Sense of Advertising: Getting the Basics Right", Sage Publications Inc, 2002. ISBN 0761997369

Given the large number of quality sources on the company, I hope the article will be restored and editors given an opportunity to source it rather than being summarily deleted without discussion. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 04:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't really notice it was under AFD review, but I did come across it and it was a blatant copy and paste of a copyrighted source. As a result the article was deleted as a copyright violation. Perhaps the article is notable, that is not my place to say, but I deleted it under standard Wikipedia copyright rules. Ben W Bell talk 04:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Can you please check if the article history contains any version that is not a copyvio, and if so restore that version ? Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 04:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Ben, as a closing admin, some amount of application is required in verifying the history of the article before deleting. Else we could just have a bot do the job. As per policy, we DO NOT simply delete the entire copyvio article off the face of wikipedia, we just delete the copyvio versions. Please be careful in the future, it could cause you some unnecessary friction with editors. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I made a mistake. Please accept my apologies, I didn't spend enough time looking through the history as I should have done. I have restored the article to before the recent copyvio version. Ben W Bell talk 15:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hello there

How are you?

Why did you delete my passage of text on the British Special Air Service page?? It was all of accurate inoformation I got it off the back of a book I am reading. It would be great if you could reply on my talk page please, and also tell me why you deleted what I did. I am actually quite interested why, lets be civil i'm not interested in edit wars etc. I would rather us both just come to a compromise :)

Thanks in advance.

Police,Mad,Jack

But its what David Stirling and Paddy thought up in 1941. Where is the problem with it?? I dont understand I must say.

Police,Mad,Jack —Preceding comment was added at 18:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok thank you for the information, and thanks for not being rude like some people on this site :)

Police,Mad,Jack —Preceding comment was added at 18:26, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Good lord, someones vandalised the article I did already. Its been on there for less than two hours :( But I undid the edit.

Police,Mad,Jack —Preceding comment was added at 21:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Blade Runner Gaffes

Would you think a new page devoted to BR errors is appropriate? With all of the new versions recently released (five different versions this month!), and the web archives of the former exhaustive analysis no longer online (that I could find anyway), it seemed like a likely Wiki to me. But I defer to your greater wisdom. Rcarlberg (talk) 04:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

A wiki article yes probably, but most likely not on Wikipedia. Your best best is to ask at the discussion pages of the project Wikipedia:WikiProject_Films. Ben W Bell talk 13:54, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Rosetta Stone‎

Hi, It seems that you may be a bit confused with the text I added to this article. Non of the authors of the report are students. Both scholars are professors. Although due to lack of funds they haven't been able to promote there report well, their thesis has still received recognition from a number of scholars for example Richard Bangs [2]. Please reconsider the changes you made to the article. Ireland101 (talk) 03:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

thanks

looks like you reverted while i was trying to revert back too. goddamned vandals. i hate em. Anastrophe (talk) 21:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't we all. We should hang em all up in the afternoon sun. Ben W Bell talk 21:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Education in Northern Ireland article

I removed the link to the article on "English Medium Primary Schools in Ireland" from the education section of the Northern Ireland article as it listed pretty much every primary school in Northern Ireland. It was thus redundant given that there exists already an article listing all primary schools in Northern Ireland. It is of course a moot point now that the article in question has been deleted and can no longer be linked to Alastairward (talk) 00:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Roger van Gool

No problem with your changes. I won't do the same mistake again!Thanks!--Latouffedisco (talk) 16:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Dont Bite The Newbies

Regarding this please WP:DBTN it was that editors first contribution and not a nice edit summary from an experienced editor. BigDunc (talk) 12:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Page Deletion Question

Ben, My page was deleted as a non-notable company only created last month. do i need to supply more information about the firm? we are noted experts in the field of safety and fire protection as confirmed by 1/26/08 appearance on CBS News Early Show. Does this information have to be posted in order to keep the page active? I noticed several peer firms have STUB listings and very little information about the firm, yet they are active.

Please advise.

Thanks, Carrie Carrieann2 (talk) 19:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

128.113.228.32

First off, thanks for your diligence in tracking down and blocking vandals.

However, you recently left a warning on the User talk page of 128.113.228.32. This is a shared IP used by a major university, and as such, there are likely multiple entities using it via NAT. Please just keep in mind the implications of blocking shared IP addresses if any vandalism from this address persists, as many others from the same address, including myself, enjoy productively contributing to Wikipedia, but prefer to do so anonymously. —Preceding comment was added at 21:58, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible vandalism

Hi Ben W Bell,

I am currently trying to improve the article [Cainnech of Aghaboe] and did change londonderry to derry, and this was my own unmeant bias and has been changed back.

Could you please give me some feedback overall on what should be done to clean up the article.

Please do not alter references to Northern Ireland to Ireland, this can be perceived as vandalism. It makes no sense to alter a reference to a country to point to an island

I feel that

Saint Canice ( Saint Kenny or in Scotland Saint Kenneth), was born in 515 or 516, at Glengiven, near Dungiven in what is now County Londonderry, in Northern Ireland.

should be changed to

Saint Canice ( Saint Kenny or in Scotland Saint Kenneth), was born in 515 or 516, at Glengiven, near Dungiven, in Ireland.

I feel that referring to the country (Northern Ireland) is not necessary when no such thing existed at that time in history, as I want to refer to the location.

However: Advice on this or an other problems related to the article ( Cainnech of Aghaboe ) are welcomed.

--Okeeffe.christopher (talk) 04:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Problem with that wording, and I have no issues with calling places what they were historically in historical times so Ireland is better than Northern Ireland, we don't know that Dungiven was a locale in that time so you're mixing the more modern with the historical right from the beginning. Unfortunately due to the early period it is probably necessary to provide some modern context as the historical sites and areas don't really exist anymore. It is always a tricky one coming up with the best compromise. I personally feel, and this isn't policy or anything, that if historical can be contextualised properly so people can understand it then it should be left historical, but it if can't and some modern context must be used then the most modern era must be used otherwise you're comparing historical to another historical point and mixing dates to become confusing. Ben W Bell talk 12:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback and advice. Okeeffe.christopher (talk) 20:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Your advice please

I have go an interesting note from User:Teknolyze

Hi. Welcome to wikipedia. Just wanted to recomend something, that guy, Ben W Bell, on who's Talk page you left a message, is up to no good. Pretty much ALL of the time when an article he's editing is about, or is related to Nothern Ireland. And he can be particularly vicous when anything pro-british is altered in any significant way. So I just thought I'd tell you to watch out for him watch out for him (he's been after me for months now). User: Teknolyze

Usually i would ignore this as nonsense but after checking some of his edits could be perceived as vandalism on the page Hiberno-English As I am newish i do not want to get into a revert war or go trying to clean. Could you advise. (Okeeffe.christopher (talk) 00:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC))

Some more advice please.

This edit was made by an Anon user. Do I Assume good faith and try to work it into the article or just revert it. What guidelines are there for me to follow. I know this is a small thing but what is the right way to do it. thanks again (Okeeffe.christopher (talk) 15:17, 14 February 2008 (UTC))

Canterbury

Read WP:MOS, and refrain from reverting edits by established users. Epbr123 (talk) 00:06, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Illegality?

In the comment page for the removal of the link, you list it as "Illegal" and a copyright violation -- although anyone who did more than a cursory glance of the pages would easily note that the content on the webpages is perfectly legal and violating no laws as it uses embeddable Hulu content. As Hulu is not open to the public, only sites like trhonline.com that embed them are usable (and they do not violate Hulu's Terms of Service either). If you reason for removing the links is that it's a "Personal Page" then I argue that every fan related resource needs to be removed from every single wikipedia page. If it's because it's "illegal" then you're just plain wrong. 68.190.175.134 (talk) 14:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The sites contain full videos of copyrighted material that hasn't been freely released into the public domain. That's piracy and illegal. Canterbury Tail talk 23:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Not when the content is via a legal and licensed source which encourages embedding on other websites. That is NOT piracy and NOT illegal. Hulu ENCOURAGES embedding - as their business model is based on commercials that play DURING the videos - which remain intact in an embedded copy (and the content technically remains on their site). It's true that Non-US visitors are blocked from watching them -- have you considered *why?* It's because they're licensed for the United States. Inclusion eligibility aside, you're seriously wrong on the legality issue on so many levels. Seriously. 68.190.175.134 (talk) 13:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Re-edited a change

Hi, I would just like to explain to you why i have re-edited a page that you have changed since i originally typed it up.

In the Down-The-Line page you edited the Address for a gun club that hosted the Home Internationals and British Open for the first time in northern ireland. You edited the address to Co. Londonderry, when i first saw this i thought it was some form of biggottry, but on your user page you say you edit for a neutral potrayal of northern ireland. I am not arguing with you whether or not it is Derry or Londonderry, what i am stating that the address for the Gun Club in question is registered as Co. Derry, all (well i would say most) local homes and businesses to the club have their addresses registered as Co. Derry. Please leave the changes as they are with the location of the club. I am sure you understand its viability.

--Weeman com (talk) 23:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

The same with the Culbann C.P.C page.

--Weeman com (talk) 23:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your thoughts on this, and for taking the time to come forward and say as much but I've changed it back. And I'll explain why. On Wikipedia the encyclopaedia strives for neutrality and not representing a particular POV. However, having said that the official line and the statements of a government or official body in an area holds much greater weight than that of some people who simply don't like something and change the name. There has never in the history of Ireland been a County Derry, only ever a County Londonderry and that is the official name of the county. Some people do call it County Derry, and I would never take away their rights to do so. In fact I believe that if the government just officially bowed to the will of the majority of residents in the area things would be much simpler and easier, but alas this isn't the case. No one on Wikipedia is removing the rights of anyone to call it what they wish, or referring to it in any manner in which they please, but on Wikipedia when we are discussing the geographical/political area of the county we have to use County Londonderry and it's not from any bigoted sense, but from neutrality. To refer to it as anything else would in fact be pushing a bias. I have a personal opinion on what it should be called, but I will never reveal that opinion on Wikipedia as it isn't the place for it. As a result it has been changed back. I appreciate your position and understand what you are saying, but I'm sure you can appreciate Wikipedia position here as well. Canterbury Tail talk 00:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I totally dispute your claims that Never in the histroy or ireland there been a county Derry. What do you call Gcontai Doire, county Derry. Your persistance and activity in other topics have left an impression that you are not actually neutral in this whole thing.--Weeman com (talk) 02:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

There has never been a County Derry in the history of Ireland, that's well known. County Londonderry was created in 1613 from County Coleraine and bits of the surrounding counties of Antrim, Donegal and Tyrone I believe. There wasn't a preceding County Derry. The County Doire thing arose as the name was never accepted by some people who created the name of County Doire or County Derry to call it themselves. However a county by that name has never officially existed as anything other than an alternative name that some people use to refer to County Londonderry. Please kindly check your history. As for my neutrality I believe I've roughly equally been called a republican (expletives) and unionist pig so in many cases people on both sides think I'm part of the other side just because history and actuality don't match their view of the world. Canterbury Tail talk 12:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

As you so clearly do not understand the situation that the club faces by your persistance, it will result in no other action but to remove all references to it and its location from wikipedia.

kindly --Weeman com (talk) 13:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Removal of Spoiler from The Crying Game

Fair enough that it's wikipedia guidelines to not put in spoiler tags. That's really dumb though -- how does one make a submission to change a guideline?

In the mean time, I'm going to go and include the spoiler for The Sixth Sense in the article summary, since it's the same deal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stewartjohnson (talk • contribs) 08:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Edits to Richard D North entry

Dear Ben W Bell,

You have very kindly taken an interest in a page which discusses me and my work, "Richard D North". [www.richarddnorth.com]

I seem to be engaged in Wiki ping-pong with someone or other, though I am not sure whom. If you are still interested I wonder if you may agree that the text below seems fair and reasonable?

Text: During a speech at Methodist College, Belfast in 2006 when he was addressing pupils from all over the United Kingdom at a Model United Nations conference North, to considerable applause, described chadors as "binliners", called disabled babies "bent", referred to working class people as "stupid", and displayed a number of offensive views. Some students were very offended. He later attempted to explain himself at his personal website [3], and visited Hampstead School (which probably had the most complainants) for a lively discussion. North is a regular speaker at schools. text ends

You may well think I am an appalling person. Nonetheless, you may think that the above is a decent account of events. I would certainly cheerfully tell you much more about what actually happened.

Best wishes rdn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdnorth (talk • contribs) 18:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Film Nationalities

Thank you for taking into account the fact that that any edits I have made regarding the nationality of films have not been POV pushing or vandalism but made due to an honest belief that my edits are correct. And I appreciate you not blocking me. But which edit exactly was it you were warning me for? You never specified. I'd like to find out so as to avoid making another apparent mistake in editing in the future. Teknolyze (talk) 21:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Vanishing

Can you please stop with the username changes, you are actually editing other people's talk comments along with altering your username, something which is frowned upon. You state yourself you no longer edit, so it shouldn't matter to you. Canterbury Tail talk 01:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't know what you mean, I am only changing instances of my old username. That is, I believe covered under the rule of privacy, in WP:RTV. Is there something else being changed? If so, I haven't noticed it in AWB, but it could be doing something else without telling me. As to why it matters to me, I can only say I do have a privacy concern, but that I can't express it in public. Similarily, I've moved the discussion here for that concern as well. FrozenPurpleCube (talk) 02:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Edits such as this one have you actually altering what other users have written. I can understand the hows and whys it happened, but it is still frowned upon to edit other users comments. As for the privacy, anyone can see the originals in the history but you're perfectly entitled to alter your own comments as you see fit. Canterbury Tail talk 02:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand your concern, but as far as I can tell, I am not altering the meaning of their words, or making any change other than changing their old username to reflect my current one. This is done for privacy concerns. I don't see anything to indicate that this is the kind of concern that involves the general admonition against editing other comments, and it is well established that privacy is a reason for editing the comments of others. Common sense does apply, and I think it's obvious. FrozenPurpleCube (talk) 02:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Please stop, you are causing mass disruption to WIkipedia with your edits, editing pages that are archived versions of pages all to no avail as nothing is hidden as the history is all there and anyone only needs to look at a single one of your edits to show what was before. So please stop. Canterbury Tail talk 02:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how it would cause any mass disruption, it's just one time, and yes, I do realize that there's a limit to what I can do, but short of getting someone to delete everything, which I think would be excessive, I'd like to go what I can. This seems to be within the realm of actions I can take. FrozenPurpleCube (talk) 02:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Gladly

Many thanks. Robertson-Glasgow (talk) 23:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

James Bond Link

Please explain why you reverted a link to James Bond Wiki. I would really like to know. It is my understanding that according to your (wikipedia's) guidelines that there are several aspects of site taking into consideration for external links. The site I added is well over a year old, contains over 600 members, has a strong moderation team, and a wealth of original as well as cited content putting it well in the 99th percentile of wiki sites on the subject. IMO it is far superior to the Bondpedia site and certainly worth a review at the least. I would really like to understand why this site is spam compared to the others. http://www.jamesbondwiki.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexwberg (talk • contribs) 00:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The link in question is a link you have been spamming over Wikipedia. In fact all your edits to Wikipedia have been concerned with inserting links to said site from various pages in Wikipedia. This constitutes linkspamming. In addition it constitutes a conflict of interest as the site you are spamming and claiming to be superior to other sites is in fact a site that you yourself founded. There is no third party evidence produced that it is a superior site, the site has been continually removed from Wikipedia in the past and for various other reasons already mentioned it has been removed. Please stop adding your own site. Canterbury Tail talk 03:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)