User talk:Spleodrach/Archive/Archive 003

Irish Green Party politicians

I noticed that you added notability tags to a few of these articles, some of which have now been removed. I think that a few need to go to AfD - if you would like to move them to this stage I would support that. regards--Vintagekits (talk) 10:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. They are non notable local councillors, including some from other parties like Labour etc. If any of them survive the 'prodding', I will AfD them. Snappy (talk) 10:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

New Ireland Wikimedia email list

Hi Snappy:

I'm delighted to announce that we've started a new Ireland Wikimedian email list, that you can join, at mail:WikimediaIE. For Wikimedians in Ireland and Wikimedians interested in events in Ireland and efforts in Ireland. It's there to to discuss meetups, partnerships with Museums and National Archives, and anything else where Wikipedia and real life intersect. --Bastique ^demandez 22:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Jack Murphy

Hi Snappy, thanks for assist on the Jack Murphy page over past few months. Appreciate you are probably busy but if you have a minute I would greatly appreciate your input on how you think the article can be improved, especially in relation to conforming to the wikipedia standards. Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mibbles (talk • contribs) 09:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Collins

Hi. I understand where you're coming from, as this is an Anglo-Sphere article and surnames and septs are of less importance in this culture... but in the Gaelic and Romance world they are of considerable importance, hence those other articles. Michael Collins was a Gael, and in my view he is misportrayed here if his ancestry is ignored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.83.40.234 (talk) 11:25, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of An Bord Pleanála and the Corrib gas project

An article that you have been involved in editing, An Bord Pleanála and the Corrib gas project, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/An Bord Pleanála and the Corrib gas project. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

GainLine ♠ _♥ 09:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

By Elections

Sorry, listening to the coverage, bit over-enthusiastic! =) Thanks! Fin©™ 12:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Hiya again. I've got a question about the table thing for the bye-elections. It says "1st Pref" in the header of one of the columns. Should this column be soley the first prefs received on the first count, or should it include the distributed votes (ie the final tally)? If not, couldn't a case arise where a table would exist with someone having the highest number of first-prefs, but not actually getting elected? Thanks! Fin©™ 21:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Ideally, it should be the result of all counts. I may add them in for Maureen O'Sullivan. Snappy (talk) 03:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, thanks! Fin©™ 12:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Spleodrach. You have new messages at Cargoking's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CargoK ^{user talk} 17:01, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

List of imprisoned members of the Oireachtas

Well done on that. List conveys more info than the cat and meets the issues raised at create time.--Rye1967 (talk) 21:17, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It's not quite finished but its nearly there. Snappy (talk) 01:43, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

RFCN

Hi there. I have closed the RFC you started at WP:RFCN because no prior discussion had occurred with the user in question. Please make sure you fully read the instructions at WP:RFCN before filing future requests. As per those instructions, there must be some attempt to discuss the issue with the user first before starting a RFC. Most username concerns can be resolved through such one-on-one discussion, and this is vastly preferable to bringing the issue before the wider community. If you have any questions about this, I would be happy to assist. -kotra (talk) 19:50, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

How incredibly naive of you! I strongly believe this is yet another sockpuppet of Bell V Bell. Snappy (talk) 04:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Even if I might have my doubts, I am assuming good faith. If you believe this is a sockpuppet, I am interested in hearing evidence. -kotra (talk) 04:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I have seen this pattern before. This person uses 'humourous' usernames but the actual edits to articles start out as good edits but over time the edits become of the 'adding dubious but not instantly dismissable as rubbish' kind, for example, they added information that asserted Gilbert and George were commissioned by Michael Ring to do an artwork for Knock Shrine, all total nonsense but just plausible enough so that other editors might think it true. This person also edits articles on Irish politics and I've noticed a new editor called User:Jack Srole, that is Jacks which is slang for toilet in Ireland, like John in the US, so the name means Toilet Roll, not offensive just juvenile. Call me cynical, but the joke names (I don't believe for 1 second that Rex Swipe is a real person) and the same pattern of editing, leaves me in no doubt that its the same reprobate up to his old tricks again. Snappy (talk) 04:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I think you may have something here. I agree that a checkuser on User:Jack Srole and User:R. Swipe as socks of User:Bell V Bell would be appropriate. I'll try to file a report in a day or two unless you do. Thanks for explaining your suspicion (though try not to assume others are gullible). -kotra (talk) 06:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest you were gullible, its just that have experienced this type of behaviour before, my suspicions were raised. I can see that from your perspective that one should assume good faith. Snappy (talk) 04:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Snappy, I replied to your recent message on my talk page. Regards, R. Swipe (talk) 12:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Irish referendum templates

I noticed that the templates Irish referendum approved and Irish referendum rejected are vary similar to and serve the same purpose as Template:Referendum. Would you object to the redirecting the Irish referendum templates to the general one? – Zntrip 19:18, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

No, I wouldn't. I suppose we should have one standard referendum template. I still object to the 2 deciaml places after the 100%, its redundant. See this example United_States_presidential_election,_2008#Nationwide Results, which doesn't use it. Snappy (talk) 05:13, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your blessings, I'll start the process of transferring the templates. We can take care of any minor concerns afterward. – Zntrip 16:29, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the electorate parameter to the template, it is quite useful. I'm not that experienced with templates, so I was wondering if you could do me a favor by making the voter turnout parameter optional like the electorate parameter. There are some instances were such information is unavailable. – Zntrip 18:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't mind my edit request, I figured it out by myself. However, if you have time you could take a look at the template documentation I made. – Zntrip 19:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Irish Constitution

Snappy, Stop reverting my verified historical info. Stop editing my talk out of your page. Please see my talk page Thx jogeoghegan (Jogeoghegan (talk) 11:38, 28 June 2009 (UTC))

Try and be Civil. "Stop editing my talk out of your page" - what are you talking about? Snappy (talk) 03:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Martin Cullen

Snappy, Please note that Martin Cullen is an elected TD hence the photo of the Chamber of the Dail, but more importantly he is the Minister that privatised Aer Lingus hence it is both relevant and correct that I included a photo of one of their planes as it is beside the body of his entry containing details of the floatation. I do not want to get involved in an edit war with you and will leave matters rest but I hope you will appreciate my valid point of view.

One picture can tell a thousand words!

Best wishes, Skreen (talk) 10:58, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. Are you suggesting that ever peron (over 1100) who has served as a member of the Dáil, should have a picture of the chamber on their article? I will remove it, if you add it again. As for the Aer Lingus, I don't think its particularly relevant but in the interests of a compromise, I'll let it pass. You should also re-read WP:IMAGE. Yes indeed a picture can tell a thousand words but if those words are irrelevant then that's not much help. Snappy (talk) 04:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Irish heads of government since 1919

Please do not revert me without comment, I am not a vandal. The use of the non-free images in this list are clearly in violation of our non-free content policy, specifically our non-free content criteria. If you disagree, you are welcome to discuss the matter, but edit warring and especially treating me like a vandal will not get you anywhere. J Milburn (talk) 20:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

i have not treated you like a vandal, that is simply your own opinion/perspective. Your arbitrary removal of certain images from the Irish heads of government list, simply because they don't meet some narrow criteria, is unwarranted because they leave the list looking bad with only half the images it should have. Snappy (talk) 22:08, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Wrong, wrong, and, oh, wrong. Reverting me without comment is treating me like a vandal- it is dismissing my edits to the extent that you do not even have to explain what is wrong with them. Removing images because they do not meet our narrow criteria is an excellent edit edit to make, and the fact it leaves "the list looking bad" is not important- we do not use non-free content for decoration, we use it to increase reader understanding of the topic. It you want the list to look prettier, display the images in a different way, add placeholder images or remove them altogether. I advise you familiarise yourself with our policies and stop edit warring. J Milburn (talk) 22:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, whatever! Go ahead, knock yourself out by removing images, because according some policy they are acceptable in one article but not acceptable in another. Also, if you still think that I am treating you like a vandal, maybe that's because you are! Albeit, one who acts within wikilawyered critera. Anyway, I though we were all here to improve the encyclopaedia but obviously, I am quite silly! Snappy (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Call me a vandal or treat me as one again, you will be blocked. We can play it your way if you're not happy to be reasonable. J Milburn (talk) 16:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

You're the one who is quite unreasonable, you're the one who thinks they are being called/treated as a vandal. You're the one who is threatening me. If you keep this up, you're the one who may be blocked. Snappy (talk) 16:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, good luck with that. J Milburn (talk) 16:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, any admins who abuse their powers can be de-sysoped, as you are no doubt aware. Hope you don't go down that road, it's a bad road! Snappy (talk) 16:37, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Bruton article

message on my page User talk:71.166.139.134 FileBot (talk) 05:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pat O'Donnell

An article that you have been involved in editing, Pat O'Donnell, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pat O'Donnell. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. FileBot (talk) 05:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Thanks!

Hello, Spleodrach. You have new messages at Gogo Dodo's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FileBot (talk) 05:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.mc.series2.010.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.mc.series2.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.mc.series2.002.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.mc.series2.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.mc.series2.001.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.mc.series2.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.va.series3.010.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series3.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.va.series2.010.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series2.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.va.series1.010.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series1.010.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.va.series3.002.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series3.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.va.series2.002.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series2.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.va.series1.002.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series1.002.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.va.series3.001.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series3.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.va.series2.001.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series2.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Eurocoin.va.series1.001.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.va.series1.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Let me make my position clear. I am very much against interfering with other editors' comments in any way, unless it is really necessary. That's not the case at Talk:Joe Higgins. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 13:33, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I see. Which talk page have you seen this happen to? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 16:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe I do. Why don't you let me decide what I worry about and answer my question? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 16:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe so. Why not try? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 16:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

rm link

Hi, regarding your removal of references on euro cent coin. Yes it is a commercial site, but it is also providing information. There's nothing wrong with using a commercial website so long as it gives reliable information, why remove it?- _J.Logan`^t: 13:13, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I thought all commercial links were banned but if this one is allowed then it could be re-added. Although, I'm sure the same info could be gotten from a non commercial site. Snappy (talk) 16:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Michael Collins (Irish leader). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. DinDraithou (talk) 19:47, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I have visited the article in question as per the Third Opinion template that DinDraithou added to it, and confirmed that consensus is as you stated it was. I have also cautioned him against edit-warring, although not with the nice fancy template he used on you. I will be watching that page for a few days, if I can be of any further service please let me know either there or on my talk page. Best, PGWG (talk) 20:44, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Gee you're not letting a veteran off by dismissing his accuser. Apparently only first-years aren't allowed to edit war. DinDraithou (talk) 21:22, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you PGWG. DinDraithou, please learn how to be civil. Snappy (talk) 22:55, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Michael Collins

Thanks for your message. I will add my tuppence worth very soon. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 22:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Ted Russell

Bless.. Yup, I was about to do that but was just checking if there were any problems. Have to admit, I must have nodded hello to the man more than once, and I didn't know he was called George. Cheers. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 15:18, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

No worries. I'm going to expand the article a littl with info with the Limerick Leader obituary. Snappy (talk) 15:21, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually I wa looking through the Leader's archives as well, and they seem to have gone from the Leader website, although I found the Leader obituary on the askabouireland site. The Leader used to have copious archived articles, but they rejigged the site a year or two ago, and the archives seem to have suffered, which is a pity. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 15:27, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

FYI

[1] Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 23:11, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguating the Lenihans

Thanks for your msg, and sorry for not spotting the previous discusssion.

I have copied your msg to Talk:Brian_Lenihan, Snr#Father_and_son and explained my reasoning there. Please could you let me know what you think?

Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:26, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Tom Kitt

Well done with this edit. The link to RoI was good, but the bit that I liked was removing the word "senior" from the lead.

The only time I ever see it used is when some journalist is trying to big up a quote, in the hope that it's more impressive to have "senior x-party TD Sean Citizen said" than just "x-party TD Sean Citizen said".

It's unclear what they even mean by it. Old? long-serving? Party office-holder? Or even doddery, as in "senior citizen".

There may be some relevance if the Oireachtas operates the same awful rule as Westminster, where an MP who held their seat for longer is more likely to be called to speak than a newbie. I dunno if that's the case, but even if that rule applies in Kildare St, it has little relevance outside the chamber.

So please zap that word unless it's well-sourced. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. The word senior does crop up alot, usually for Fianna Fail TDs. Someone in the past may have added it (in good faith) to mean long standing and/or ministers but I agree with you, that it should be zapped. Snappy (talk) 21:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Geographical co-ordinates in constituency articles

I am concerned that the application of geographical co-ordinates (or of {{coord missing}} tags) to articles on parliamentary constituencies may be misleading to readers. There seems to be a lot of this underway at the moment, including Irish constituencies. I have opened a centralised discussion on this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Use_of_co-ordinates_in_parliamentary_constituencies, and would welcome your input, whether or not you agree with me!

Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Statistics on the duration of Dails

Hi, I've been doing some research on the Dails since 1937 and noticed that the duration figures you give are calculated from election to election. Should that be from first meeting of the Dail to the date of its Dissolution? I'm unsure about the distinction between dates for the Dail and Government - I presume the Government is formed at the 1st meeting of the Dail, but does it remain in power in the period from dissolution to next Dail, or is it dissolved together with the Dail? I'm sure the answer could be easily found, but, to be honest, with a dial-up internet connection, I'm not too inclined to go searching (maybe in 2020, when the next generation broadband rolls out).

If you want them, I have the dates for most of the dissolutions and am searching on government web sites for the others.

Scartboy (talk) 16:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, curiosity got the better of me. I've skimmed through the constitution and found the following:

Article 13.1 1° The President shall, on the nomination of Dáil Éireann, appoint the Taoiseach, that is, the head of the Government or Prime Minister. 2° The President shall, on the nomination of the Taoiseach with the previous approval of Dáil Éireann, appoint the other members of the Government. Section 28 has the following:

Article 28.11 1° If the Taoiseach at any time resigns from office the other members of the Government shall be deemed also to have resigned from office, but the Taoiseach and the other members of the Government shall continue to carry on their duties until their successors shall have been appointed.

2° The members of the Government in office at the date of a dissolution of Dáil Éireann shall continue to hold office until their successors shall have been appointed.

This suggest to me that the durations are as follows:

Dail: from 1st meeting to dissolution Govt: from 1st meeting to 1st meeting of the next Dail (or resignation)

All assuming that the formation of the Government is agreed and takes place on the first day of the new Dail.

Scartboy (talk) 17:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Just to add to the fun,

a) I may be mistaken, but ISTR that there may have been occasions when a Taoiseach was not elected on the first day of the Dail. 1981?

b) As far as I understand it, the sequence of events is election of Ceann Comhairle and Leas-CC; election of Taoiseach; Taoiseach formally appointed by President; Taoiseach return to Dail to seek approval for his list of ministers; President appoints ministers.

That's a lot to get through on one day (two trips to the park are required), and it's only at the final step that the new govt takes office. May I suggest some checking of the official reports of new Dala would be advisable? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Interesting question. I would have thought that the Dáil length was from its 1st meeting to its dissolution (As Scartboy says). Yes, the duration of a government is different as it continues after the dissolution, and on until a new government is formed, not necessarily on the same day as the first meeting of the new Dáil. It's been a while since I did lengths on some of the Dála, please update them if there are any inaccuracies. Snappy (talk) 21:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll do so, Snappy. I'm beginning to regret starting on this as the dates are a lot more difficult to determine than I thought. BrownHairedGirl is correct about the sequence of events. In general, the nomination and appointment of a Taoiseach take place on the first day of the new Dail. However, n 1989 and 1992, this didn't happen - Charles Haughey was nominated 19 days (just four Dail days later, in the alternate universe occupied by our public representatives) after the first sitting of the 26th Dail. In 1992, the intervening Christmas holidays resulted in an even longer delay, with Albert Reynolds being nominated on 5th January 1993, 22 earth days and 5 Dail days after the first sitting.

In most cases, the Dail was adjourned while the nominee for Taoiseach headed off to the Park and returned later or on the following day to announce his appointment. The vote on the nomination of the members of the new Government was usually proposed on the following day, followed by another trip to the Park for the lucky new Ministers.

As regards the length of a Dail, the dates of the first and last sitting are easily found in the Dail record. However, the date of dissolution is not always mentioned during the closing sitting(s). In some cases, they closed down for the hols and never came back, due to an election being called. In others, the last mention on the record is just that the Dail was recessed "sine die". I'm missing about two-thirds of the dissolutions since the Ninth Dail. Since the Dail must be dissolved by the President, I'll search there for the missing dates.

What particulary struck me when looking through the records was the length of time between the last sitting of one Dail and the first sitting of the new one, followed by a sharp intake of breath when I saw how many days in the year the Dail actually sits. I'll put up this data when I have it all assembled.

While researching, I came across the question of the "Phantom Taoiseach", which addresses the Constitutional anomoly relating to "the status of a Taoiseach who, although he has lost the support of a majority in Dáil Éireann, has had his resulting request for a Dáil dissolution refused by the President of Ireland, and who therefore remains in office in a caretaker capacity". Unfortunately, I discovered that a Wikipedia article discussing it had been deleted from Wikipedia, citing it as "non-notable", in June 2008[2]. The article is still available on AllExperts[3] and Deletionpedia[4]. I think it should be restored. I'm a nooby to WP, but I gathered from the guidelines that I should first contact the "deleter" to request its re-instatement and I have done so. I would appreciate support from anyone who agrees that this topic is more than non-notable.

PS In a search on another topic, I came across the following page, which surely takes the prize for non-notability - check out Kief, North Dakota. Hint - look at the area and population figures.

List of sources for anyone who wants them:

http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie Historical Dail Debates

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/Main.aspx Current Oireachtas Debates - Official Site

http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates Current Oireachtas Debates - Public Service Site

Department of the Taoiseach - History of Governments

Scartboy (talk) 20:25, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the Dail lengths are tricky. I remember the Phantom Taoiseach, the consensus was to delete. I voted to keep. It is an esoteric topic so I'm not sure if it deserves its own article but it probably deserves a paragraph in Taoiseach. Snappy (talk) 20:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

O'Keefe and education cuts

"Incensed" was an appropriate description. As you appear to object to this i have changed it to "outraged" and attributed a source. I have also changed amended back to breached. You cannot unilaterally amend an agreement. If one party makes changes without the other parties "agreement" it is breached. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwrbs (talk • contribs) 12:08, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Read WP:RS Snappy (talk) 12:23, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Editing Brian Cowen

Please explain where the copyright violation is in quoting a fact with supporting link a youtube link.Zubenzenubi (talk) 18:54, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

See my reply on the relevant talk page. Snappy (talk) 18:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Enda Kenny

You removed a section dedicated to the criticism of Enda Kenny, stating that Brian Cowen does not have one. This is untrue, as he has one under the guise of "Public Image". Enda's criticism section should be re-instated on that premise, under Public Image title if you wish. Dornálaíocht (talk) 16:33, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

All politicians in office receive criticism, but I have never seen any wikipedia guidelines that say there should be a criticism section. Can you point them out to me? And to balance are we going to have a Praise section? Snappy (talk) 16:39, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

If there are no guidelines, then why did you remove a perfectly valid criticism section? Why is there a section dedicated to the criticism of Brian Cowen, but Enda Kenny cannot receive a similar section specific to issues surrounding racism and attacks on the Irish language? Dornálaíocht (talk) 16:52, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Please stop having the same conversation on two different talk pages. Continue this on Enda Kenny's page. Snappy (talk) 17:00, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of James Beckett (disambiguation)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is James Beckett (disambiguation). 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 Wikipedia:Notability and "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(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Beckett (disambiguation). 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.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:18, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Standard wikitables?

I've reverted your edits on List of Provosts of Trinity College, Dublin. Could you please show me on which particular WP guideline/policy page(s) states that forcing % widths isn't done any more? And also could you show me on which Wiki guideline/policy page(s) that wikitables have to conform the standard? -- Regards Scrivener-uki (talk) 23:08, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I have replied on the talk page of the article in question, continue any discussion on this page. Snappy (talk) 23:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

On which WP guideline/policy page(s) state that "There should be no forced widths in the table"? -- Scrivener-uki (talk) 23:37, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Which part of continue this discussion on the relevant talk page is unclear to you? Snappy (talk) 23:39, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

You have NOT answered my question. But in answer to your example about the list of US presidents, List of popes, List of Archbishops of Canterbury and List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom do use width in tables. -- Scrivener-uki (talk) 23:46, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Here on your user talk page you said above "I have replied on the talk page of the article in question, continue any discussion on this page. Obviously we got mixed which page we are talking about -- Scrivener-uki (talk) 23:56, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Bernard O'Rourke

If you look at the database you will find both names used, In all records of voting in the house he appears as Bernard O'Rourke. In the book about him Inniskeen 1912-1918 (The Political perspective of Bernard O'Rourke} by Terence Dooley Four Courts press he isnt called Brian. MCC records show him as Bernard. I presume Brian was an Irish version of Bernard. I do know he called his son Brian but his grandson is called Bernard. His headstone reads Bernard. Im presently doing a page on him and I thought it made more sense to change here than put in a redirect.

Fine and please sign your posts in future. Snappy (talk) 16:49, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and apologies for oversight on signing. He was a pro treaty Sinn Fein member and afterwards a member of Cumann na nGaedhael and Fine Gael so is the description independent right? Cathar11 (talk) 18:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

The oireachtas db describes him as independent from 1922-28 and then nothing for the remainder. The oireachtas db is sometimes wrong or incomplete, so if you have info that he was pro-Treaty SF/CnaG/FG then he can be entered as such for the appropriate times. Snappy (talk) 18:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Ta, very

for repairing Shatter's pipe ClemMcGann (talk) 01:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Current TDs

Template:Current TDs has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

John Bailey (Irish politician)

Just a friendly heads up on John Bailey (Irish politician). You prodded this article a couple of months ago, and it's now been restored as a contested prod. Given that it's been prodded twice, I've suggested to the editor who asked for restoration that they talk to you about your concerns. (See Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Current_requests#John_Bailey_.28Irish_politician.29). If you still think he's not notable, feel free to take to AfD. Cheers! --Fabrictramp | talk to me 11:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm very surprised you restored this article. It's about a non notable local politician, one of over 1500 local councillors in Ireland, 99.9% of whom have no claims to fame outside there immediate locality. I will certainly be AFD'ing it. Snappy (talk) 11:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Restoring contested prods, even after they have been deleted, is considered an uncontroversial restoration and usually done simply on request. The idea is that if someone is objecting, even months later, it's not a suitable candidate for prod. Cheers! --Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:23, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. I have AFD'ed it anyway. Snappy (talk) 18:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Do you want to discuss this before nominating for AFD? MoyrossLADY (talk) 11:59, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

No, already done, please discuss it at AFD. Snappy (talk) 12:04, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Mark Dearey

Is this local politician notable. Should you propose Mark Dearey for afd too. Its been Prod recently for the second time.Cathar11 (talk) 18:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

IMHO, he is not notable, unless you count being only one of 3 green party councillors and retaining his seat in 2009 local elections (which I don't). The prod was contested so you can't prod it again but you will have to AFD it. Also, most of the article is a cut and paste job from his green party website bio. Anyway, there are far too many of these non notable local councillor articles being created by their family, friends, supporters and party activists. I have nominated 3 of them recently. Snappy (talk) 18:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Successions

Hey, if I knew making this many mistakes would make me popular, I would've been sloppy a long time ago! Thanks, all help very much apprecieated! Fergananim (talk) 21:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

John Timoney (disambiguation)

Hello. Just to let you know that this dab has been nominated for deletion using Template:db-disambig. If you have any questions about this, please let me know. Best wishes and keep up all your good work, Boleyn3 (talk) 18:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Spleodrach. You have new messages at AtSwimTwoBirds's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please

Consider your actions. I'm not asking much. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 13:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Stop harassing me. Snappy (talk) 13:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe I am. You have systematically blanked comments of mine here and at Talk:Joe Higgins. I ask only two things of you: firstly, that you explain your sock/meatpuppet/city boy description of me and secondly, that you explain your blanking of my and others' comments on the Higgins talk page. Look at your behaviour; who's harassing who? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 13:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

You are still harassing me after I asked to stop in my previous comment. I don't answer to you. You are the one that has an RfE open against you, not me. Any further discussion will take place there NOT HERE. Snappy (talk) 13:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

You made a serious accusation about me. Will you be raising that issue at the RfE? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 14:03, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

(e/c) I have restored the anon comment on Talk:Joe Higgins, as it includes opinion about the article at the time. this six month edit-war is mind boggling. Was it elevated to one of the noticeboards? It does not appear to have been. Anyway, you both need to put down the stick. If someone else wants to remove it again, it will be discussed at a noticeboard. --John Vandenberg ^(chat) 14:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Fine, I will not remove the anon comment or edit war on Joe Higgins' talk page again. Snappy (talk) 14:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Glad that's over. Will you be raising your accusation at the RfE? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 14:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Caption on map of Ireland

Sir or Madam: I corrected a caption in an image today and you undid my correction. I have entered the correction again and I have troubled to explain why in detail in the article's associated talk page: Talk:Local government in the Republic of Ireland, in the section entitled Correction to map caption. -- 174.16.16.196 (talk) 04:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Fergananim

Hi Snappy

I see we have both left a few notes for Fergananim (talk · contribs), mine rather grumpier and more verbose than your short and friendly ones.

But I am a bit concerned about it all. Ferganim isn't a new editor, but is creating articles at a ferocious rate ... which would be fine in theory except that quantity seems to be an absolute priority over quality. Those artucles are are full of MOS problems, with non-standard disambiguators and few categories or stub tags, no footnotes, and often very dubious notability. Ferganim is always really friendly and nice in discussion, and is clearly thoroughly well-intentioned, so I have no difficulty in WP:AGFing ... but nobody's requests for restraint seem to be getting through. I was also quite alarmed by a series of Ferganim's articles referring to Irish War of Independence killings as "murders", a loaded word which shouldn't be used in WP:NPOV coverage of a guerilla war, and by the creation of dozens of stub articles on what appears to be everyone mentioned in a book on Galway writers, which is why I have PRODded a long list of articles created by Fergananim.

I have tidied up some of the articles, though in each case there is a lot of work involved in even getting them into the shape of vaguely passable stubs, and I'm beginning to think that this is all becoming a bit of problem. Is it really appropriate for one editor to splatter out so much clearly sub-standard work that plenty of others have to put in just as much time tidying up afterwards? At what point does this become disruptive editing?

I value your readiness to disagree with me as stridently if you see fit, so I'd really value a second-opinion from you here, particularly since I felt my temper slipping a bit on occasion. What do you think of it all? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:58, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Me, strident! Well, I suppose I can be on occasion but as long as we disagree civilly! As for Fergananim, I too would AGF but as you point out he has been around quite a while so he should know better. Most editors improve over time, he does not appear to be in that category. Which leads to believe he a) is absent minded or b) does not care about MOS, Notability etc or c) is a lazy sod. At the mo, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and I'll go for a).

I am surprised at the amount of Galway related articles. Is everyone there, past and present, notable? I myself spent a long weekend in Galway in 2005, my turn should be coming soon then! He recently created an article for Ann Coleman, a tragic case [5] but sadly the only thing notable about her life was her death. For an editor who has been on wikipedia since March 2004, he really ought to know better about biographical notability guideline. (Btw, I prodded the article and it was deleted). He really ought to re-read them or read them!

I don't think he is editing disruptively but you are correct when you point out that it is not up to me or you or any other editor to clean up his messy articles. He is clearly going for the quantity over quality, and hoping others will clean/tidy his creations. I did some clean up on the Mayors of Galway, but I will not be doing that any more. Btw, how come every Mayor of Galway since the office was created is notable?! I came across something interesting recently on wikipedia, (I actually read it and learn things when not editing it!). It is called Hanlon's razor, also if you read the article, read the quote from General Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord. Quite amusing!

I'm not sure of what can be done about Fergananim's editing, you've has the wikipedia equivalent of a quiet word which doesn't seem to have worked. A stern word? Maybe he doesn't realise what his editing is doing. Perhaps he needs to be made aware of it in no uncertain terms. Snappy (talk) 17:45, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

AFD typo?

Hi Snappy

Did you miss out a "not" in the first sentence of this comment? As in " does not work properly"? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:12, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for spotting that! Btw, signing off now so will get back to you on the issue above tomorrow. Snappy (talk) 02:15, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Alex White

I support and admire what you are doing. However, can I just point out two inaccuracies in the article about me? It is mentioned that I was a student activist in TCD which is true. However, the reference to the League for a Workers Republic is questionable, since whereas it is true that I was a supporter for a while, I was also a supporter of a number of other left wing groups at different times. Frankly, I must question why the article gives such prominence to this, given that there is no mention at all of more relevant details such as the fact that I was President of the Students Union in Trinity, and was later an officer of USI. Finally, whereas it is nice to read that I only lost out in 2007 by "a few dozen votes" this really is not at all accurate, as the official results will show! Kind regards. Alex White —Preceding unsigned comment added by Senator alex white (talk • contribs) 19:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Well "Senator", your hair turned white overnight! See here. I have edited the article to try and make it more accurate. Mentioning LWR in one sentence is hardly giving it prominence. Middle aged people in public life often regret their youthful enthusiasms! Please discuss any further issues on this article on its talk page. Also, do bear in mind that editing one's own article on Wikipedia is a no-no, see WP:COI. Snappy (talk) 23:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Oscar Traynor and Fianna Fail

Dear Snappy (who won't reveal his real name)

Why do you keep changing my edits to the wikipedia entry on Oscar Traynor? I added information about his involvement in the Rose Tattoo case which I think is of huge historic interest. Why do you delete it? Is it because his actions here do not match the hagiographies written about anyone who was involved in Ireland's independence movement. That a politician deferring to the Roman Catholic Church is somehow not compatible with the modern nationalist history of these people. You imply that my page is biased but I would argue, Sir, that you are biased. You call the man a revolutionary. There is nothing revolutionary about shooting policemen in the back of their heads and then joining a cabinet that protected paedophiles and shut down plays that they perceived went against the teachings of a church.

Secondly why do you keep changing my edit of Fianna Fail and how dare you call it vandalism? They do have a history of corruption. That is simply fact. Two of their TDs have gone to gaol in the last ten years. Their leader, Charles Haughey, was instrumental in setting up the provisional IRA, smuggled arms to Northern Ireland and is documented as receiving thousands of pounds in bribes. I haven't even gone into their disgraceful relationship with the banks and developers. I say on my page that they had a deferential attitude to the catholic church. Again this is fact. They consistently voted against contraceptive and divorce and most recently the Ryan Commission on child abuse explicitly stated that the department of education showed a deferential attitude toward the Catholic church. Since FF have been in power for most of the the 20th century it is reasonable to say that the dep. of education for most of this period has been run by FF ministers. They were also the political party to bring in a ban on the sale of tampons in the 1940s. The minister behind this was Con Ward.

So please do not accuse me of bias and please refrain from vandalizing my edits in future.

Regards,

Andrew —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewlegge (talk • contribs) 22:59, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, my real name is irrelevant but if you want you can call me Bob. You edits to Oscar Traynor and FF are unrefereced, uncited, unsourced, full of your own opinion and possible original research. Try reading the following: WP:NPOV, WP:RS, WP:V and WP:OR. Might be no harm if you read WP:CIVIL as well. There already is a section on corruption in the FF article, if you'd bothered to read it properly. Any more information (properly sourced and referenced and npov) should go in that section, not it the lead. This is an encyclopedia, which is neutral, bear that in mind. You may valid info to add to the articles but you're going about it the wrong way. As far the info about Conn Ward and tampons, I already knew that because its in his article. If you continue adding united pov to article, it will be removed if not by me then by others. There are rules on wikipedia, we all have to abide by them. Snappy (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Templates for discussion

You do know that you haven't voted in the IrishM discussion, do you? Only in the one above it. Not that you're obliged to vote or anything, I just thought I'd say it in case you thought you had. Scolaire (talk) 18:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I have voted now. Snappy (talk) 18:22, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Luas

Yes, I acknowledged my "lights on, nobody home" moment on the Stop the luas AFD. My brain definitely wasn't in gear there; maybe whatever happened is related to the fact that Peg Sayers still stalks me in nightmares. ;) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:22, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Peig gets blamed for alot of stuff, sure she wasn't that bad, but I wouldn't like to be stalked by her! Snappy (talk) 19:49, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

List of futurologists

You may be interested in this proposal. --Michael C. Price ^talk 11:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Commissioner pages

can you just pop onto the talk page for List_of_European_Commission_portfolios, as your work is going over the same areas as I. I did put a notice out on selected talk pages for the posts but you may not have seen it. I am still compiling and updating that page but after I've finished I'll start on what I'm talking about on the talk page.- _J.Logan`^t: 19:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

OK. I'll take a break from this from now. Snappy (talk) 19:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

George Lee

Second one in a week to go back to RTÉ! I think George Lee (Irish journalist) would be a much better title for the article, as it was his last position. It is most likely that he'll return to RTÉ. Cheers, —  Cargoking  talk  16:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Who was the other one? Well, I've just moved him to economist. Journalist may be more appropriate but he doesn't need the Irish qualifier as he is the only one. Also, he hasn't gone back to RTE yet. The move to George Lee (journalist) will be to be requested though. Snappy (talk) 17:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, just journalist. The article was journalist before politician. I'd say just move it. If we request it'll take 7 days. —  Cargoking  talk  17:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

We can't move it, because its been edited more than one (to avoid double redirects), but its non controversial so it should be a problem. Alternatively, you could ask a friendly admin. And who was the second one to go back to RTE? Snappy (talk) 17:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You can move over a redirect. Charlie Bird being in Washington counts a being away from RTÉ in my books. —  Cargoking  talk  17:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't count Charlie Bird, he didn't leave RTE. You can only move over a redirect if it hasn't been edited more than once. Try it yourself and see! Snappy (talk) 17:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Damn you! Requested moves it is then. —  Cargoking  talk  17:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Relax, it only takes a week! Snappy (talk) 18:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

(←) After the whole George Lee thing has cooled down and he is in a permanent job again, GA perhaps? (Or maybe sooner because of WP:CUP!) —  Cargoking  talk  21:03, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the article is defo a contender, unlike the subject who is a has been! I confess, this is the first I've heard of the WikiCup, so I must read up on it. Snappy (talk) 21:49, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes. Think about entering it next year! This is my first. —  Cargoking  talk  22:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Best of luck! Snappy (talk) 23:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Guru, will I go ahead and nominate George for GA? I have a contact who might review it promptly. —  Cargoking  talk  14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

That's Mr. Guru to you! ;-) Yes, you should nominate George Lee, its in good shape, has lots of refs, a photo, plenty details about his background, his RTE career and his (brief) political career. I'm sure it can be improved further but do nominate it for GA. I'd be interested to see what the review says. Snappy (talk) 14:39, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done —  Cargoking  talk  14:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

(←) After a about a year the content of an Irish Times article is protected, needing a fee. If they are archived, the content can be used for citational purposes, without having to pay €10 for one day's viewing. —  Cargoking  talk  16:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

That's handy, I must start using it in future. Snappy (talk) 17:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Good call at W. T. Cosgrave

An IP changed the infobox image (un-noticed by me while reviewing 'recent changes'). This set in train a series of good faith though erroneous edits. Just letting you know how the boo-boo came about. RashersTierney (talk) 23:00, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

No worries! Snappy (talk) 23:23, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Violation of 1RR

The Sinn Féin Article as clearly stated on the top of the Article Talk Page is subject to a 1 Revert restriction for editors. Your edit here clearly violates the 1RR as it followed your similar edit here. Please self revert, as violation can result in sanctions. Thanks, --Domer48_'fenian' 18:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of the 1RR rule for this article. Anyway, I've a proper non primary source ref for the Left wing position. Snappy (talk) 18:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I've also added a number of academic published sources, which again took all of two seconds to source. Thanks for the self revert though, --Domer48_'fenian' 18:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, why didn't you insert that ref in the first place if it only took you "two seconds"? You're around here long enough to know about the difference between primary sources and reliable sources! Snappy (talk) 18:41, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Rather than add a reference you remove the text? Yeh right! --Domer48_'fenian' 20:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Of course, unsourced or badly sourced text should be removed. It only takes "two seconds"! Snappy (talk) 20:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Succession boxes

Why did you remove {{navboxes}} from the TD's pages? Gnevin (talk) 10:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Following this discussion, they were removed. As BHG said: "Hiding content to no useful purpose is just putting obstacles in the path of the reader." Snappy (talk) 13:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough but a change of this scale should of been discusses at WP:IWNB. I have a feeling down the road these navboxes will be back but I don't care enough to re-add them and it's not like the orginal con was rock solid Gnevin (talk) 14:22, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Probably should have been discussed in a wider forum, I mentioned that in my discussion with BHG. I would have notified you but back then you were retired from wikipedia. Anyway, I doubt they'll be back, they are hardly used outside Irish pages, in effect they are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Snappy (talk) 14:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok that's grand . Thanks for your time Gnevin (talk) 15:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Mark Dearey

I am requesting undelete of Mark Dearey as he is replacing DdB in the seanad. MoyrossLADY (talk) 16:59, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, go ahead, no problems there. As a member of a national legislature, he meets notability guidelines. Busy day here, I see Trevor Sargent has resigned as well! Snappy (talk) 17:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

So, Snappy, is that the sound of revving up for an election I hear? :) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 17:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

It could well be! The government currently reminds me of a game of Jenga, where most of the pieces have been removed. All it will take is for one more piece to be taken out, and the whole tottering edifice will come crashing down! Snappy (talk) 18:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Re Gary Fitzgerald

Thanks for the feedback.

I do not think that I have done the subject justice by characterising him as a politician (ie failed local election candidate), when his notoriety (ie Young Blood profile, Week in Politics, part of lead item on 6-1 news on 18/02) comes from his activity/litigation ie breaching Cabinet Confidentiality, complaint to gardai, and also his running against NAMA from a party within government.

In this regard I note Roderic O'Gorman has lost his page, but Anthony Coughlan/Raymond Crotty retain theirs (the decision in Gary Fitzgerald High Court on the Cabinet Confidentiality is due at the end of March).

I will expand on the above points, relegate the electoral side and put in more links. Dublinborn (talk) 17:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to contest the prod. However, if you do, I will nominate it for deletion. Comparing this article with others is not how things are done here, each article stands or falls on its own merits. As for the complaint to the gardai, that's clearly a case of WP:1E. As for Nama, lots of people in the Greens are against it, not just him. Please read notability guidelines for wikipedia, see WP:Notability. Snappy (talk) 19:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

The article has been amended and (hopefully) improved. There are a large number of independent, reliable media sources cited showing the subject's political activism on 3 fronts, NAMA, O'Dea and Cabinet Secrecy (the significance of which cannot be downgraded). Can you please cast a critical eye over the articl? Thanks, again. Dublinborn (talk) 19:41, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD'd. Snappy (talk) 21:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

GA!

You need one of these!

This user helped promote George Lee (journalist) to good article status.

—  Cargoking  talk  23:22, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Fantastic news! Well done to all those who contributed, and especially to you for nominating the article. Snappy (talk) 23:32, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Abuse of rollback

Your revert here, to restore biased editorializing to an article without a proper edit summary, is an abuse of the rollback tool, which is solely provided for the purposes of reverting vandalism. 86.45.135.75 (talk) 18:35, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

The British government did not recognise the Government of the Irish Republic. It's a fact. The removal of facts is considered vandalism and therefore not an abuse of rollback as you allege. Snappy (talk) 21:36, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Nessan Quinlivan

You have a link on the Nessan Quinlivan page to Maurice Quinlivan loosing a court case against Willie O'Dea.

As we are all aware, Maurice Quinlivan subsequently was successfull in this court action.

I think my reference to the final results is a fair addition as to just leave the previous post up on its own would give casual readers an incomplete view.

Or perhaps it would be better to delete both our links to to the court case?

Limerickborn (talk) 20:30, 21 March 2010 (UTC)Limerickborn

The main subject of the reference is unimportant, in this case the reference is to verify that Nessan Quinlivan and Maurice Quinlivan are brothers. The RTE link does not mention this so I have removed it. The Limerick Leader article mentions they are brothers hence the reason for its inclusion, the fact that its from April 2009 before later events, is irrelevant. Snappy (talk) 21:10, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Has the references section on the Nessan Quinlivan page been restricted? Limerickborn (talk) 07:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)Limerickborn

I don't understand your question. Snappy (talk) 18:17, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Peter Keane (Galway City Councillor))

The tag was removed by another ed., so I nominated it for AfD. DGG ( talk ) 20:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Snappy (talk) 20:08, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Enya

Please stop removing the Irish Roman Catholics on the Enya page. It has already been established that Enya is a practicing Roman Catholic. This category has been a part of her biography page. She attends Mass in Ireland with her family and performed for Pope John Paul II. Her music is spiritual, not just a type of New Age music. Feel free to contribute, but do not vandalize others' works. --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 17:04, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, I only removed it once, secondly, you claim she is a practising catholic which may be true but if you had bothered to read the inclusion criteria on Irish Roman Catholics, it states "either past or present for whom their membership was or is a defining characteristic or related to their notability and where the person has self-indentified as a Roman Catholic". Clearly, Enya does not meet this criteria. Whether her music is spiritual or new age is a matter of opinion. Finally, removing a category based in the correct reading of the inclusion criteria is not vandalism and its pretty nasty of you to accuse me of same. Snappy (talk) 20:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Photographs

Hi Snappy,It is extremely difficult to get photos that are not copyrighted as most are originated by media or commercial organisations. You should note however that Wikipedia is covered by Florida as opposed to Irish Law and I have learnt (on Wiki Commons) that reproductions of photos that have been put in the public domain (i.e.election posters or political leaflets) fall into this category and can be used for non commercial purposes. Also were consent is given by a subject for their photo or image to be used for non commercial purposes (e.g. a charity or not for profit website) that particular image is in the public domain and again can be used for non commercial purposes under the US fifth amendment protection. The photo police did take down one of my photos but I successfully argued my point. You should note that user Dubheire specialises in taking photos of people and places around Dublin for Wikipedia (very nice person also).Keep trying and you will eventually come across a suitable, albeit sometimes disappointing, image that can be used on Wiki. I am an admirer of all your work and hope our paths will cross again.Skreen (talk) 16:06, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

President of Ireland

Snappy, do you not think the pronunciation spelling I added to President of Ireland is helpful? Despite the fact that I studied English at university, even I find the IPA spelling of Uachtarán na hÉireann [ˈuəxt̪ˠəɾˠɑːn̪ˠ n̪ˠə ˈheːɾʲən̪ˠ] to be impenetrable gobbledygook, which is why I augmented those obscure hieroglyphics with the helpful pronunciation insight which would assist non-Irish readers. Can we not have another think about this? I don't want to engage in a pointless edit war with you. I'm only trying to make the article that tiny bit more helpful to foreign readers. --O'Dea (talk) 01:19, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

No, I don't find it helpful. The problem with your phonetic standard is that it is Hiberno-centric English pronunciation, an American, Scot, Australian, New Zealand speaker will also pronounce it differently, which is why there is a standard called IPA. Yes, it requires a bit of study but so do most languages. The best solution would be a sound file with a native Irish speaker saying the phrase, until we have one please don't add your own pronunciation guide. Also, Uachtarán na hÉireann is not the commonly used phrase in English, its President of Ireland, unlike Taoiseach, so you're putting in a pronunciation guide for the Irish language version of the article title. Snappy (talk) 14:27, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Snappy, you say the "problem" is that I'm using Hiberno-centric English pronunciation, but such pronunciations are not wrong, nor can foreigners easily reproduce all the fine delicacies of the Irish accent with machine-tooled precision, but that is acceptable. I cannot try to speak with a South African accent without sounding foolish.

In any case, OOK-therawn na HAY-run is not an example of Hiberno-English, rather, it is the sound of Irish itself. OOK is not a word in any variety of English; therawn rhymes with lawn in all varieties of English; HAY is a commonly known word; so is run. These are not Hibernicisms and can be read and sounded by any reader of English.

Which part of OOK-therawn na HAY-run would be badly misunderstood by an American or Scot? Even when reading IPA, people will make different sounds based on their local accents: that is unavoidable. I know that pronunciation spelling is not as exact as IPA, but whatever subtle loss of accuracy might occur is well compensated for by a good understanding of how it sounds, conveyed by the pronunciation spelling. Also, given the great range of accents with which both Irish and English are spoken within Ireland itself, there is no absolute set of standard pronunciations in either language.

A man from Donegal would not dare tell a Kerryman his pronunciation is wrong, in either language. Given the very large diversity of pronunciations among Irish people themselves (even within one single city, Dublin, there are quite a few very distinctive accents with unmissable sound differences), I'm sure, from that perspective, that English-speaking foreigners can do really rather well with OOK-therawn na HAY-run. I crafted the spelling carefully to make the sounds as self-evident as possible.

You say IPA requires a bit of study, which is the point I raised in my first remarks: that is my precise justification for including the pronunciation spelling in the first place, because to most people [ˈuəxt̪ˠəɾˠɑːn̪ˠ n̪ˠə ˈheːɾʲən̪ˠ] is meaningless, worse than Double Dutch because even the IPA alphabet looks bizarre.

I know that Uachtarán na hÉireann is not the standard English phrase, as you say, but the point is that the term is used in the article which is why I improved the knowledge contained in the article by adding the pronunciation spelling to make it a smoother experience for non-Irish people. Of course, the problem could be solved by removing the Irish term from this English article, but I don't advocate that.

You deleted my pronunciation spelling without deleting the IPA spelling, therefore your action is inconsistent; so is your justification of it ("you're putting in a pronunciation guide for the Irish language version of the article title").

A sound file would be excellent, but that is not a reason to delete the pronunciation spelling since the latter would, 1) spare readers the burden of having to download the sound file, especially on slow links (not all readers are in Western Europe--I am not); 2) the pronunciation spelling is much quicker to read than performing a download and, therefore, a courtesy to the reader; and 3) ogg files won't play in some older browsers.

In either case, whether the sound file is present or not, there are excellent arguments for including a pronunciation spelling because it is accessible to people, like me, who do not understand IPA (while this Wikipedia is in English, IPA is not). Pronunciation spelling increases knowledge--the function of the encyclopaedia. It is also courteous writing style--you could write an article sprinkled liberally with tasty and learned Greek or Latin terms but that would not help many modern readers. You could argue back that if they had a proper classical education they could manage, like saying they should know IPA to derive insight from the encyclopaedia, but that would be insupportable intellectual snobbery (I am not accusing you of this). The thing is, Wikipedia is not written by professors for PhD candidates: it is a popular encyclopaedia. Non nobis solum.

In any case, there is no sound file, for now.

You can enter a building by the steps but if a wheelchair ramp is added, no-one destroys it, you see? It is just being helpful and broadening access. Including the pronunciation spelling cannot be accused of harming Wikipedia.

Since you argue that the IPA spelling can be augmented by providing a sound file, you have, thereby, agreed in principle that we are not bound to limit ourselves to the IPA spelling alone. Therefore, we can apply your argument again by including a brief pronunciation spelling, being helpful with a small effort.

When I ask you, do you not think the pronunciation spelling is helpful, I don't mean helpful to you personally. Being Irish, you know already how to pronounce it without needing the IPA. I meant, don't you see how helpful it would be to a New Zealander? I am certain non-Irish people would find it illuminating. Most Wikipedia readers have not been blessed with an Irish education--can't we help them overcome this terribly sad handicap? Where is your compassion for the wretched? Please think about it. Wait a couple of days before replying and let it simmer quietly in the back of your mind. Thank you. --O'Dea (talk) 22:35, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Look at the President of Turkey, afterwards it has the name in Turkish - Cumhurbaşkanı. There is no pronunciation guide IPA or otherwise. There are lots of non-English language offices and titles in en.wikipedia, are you going to insert your OR pronunciation guide into all of them? Anyway, your "guide" doesn't really help people much, they will have a slightly closer approximation of the actual pronunciation. No amount of home grown phonetic guides will help me pronounce Eyjafjallajökull, but listening to the sound file helps. A sound file as I said before is the ultimate solution, and if a user has enough bandwidth to download the article which includes several images, then a tiny 5 second sound file won't be much of a burden. Also, you should read Wikipedia:IPA for English. Snappy (talk) 12:39, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Snappy, you have entirely ignored the arguments I put to you and failed to acknowledge the internal inconsistencies of yours that I identified. I don't believe in your good faith. It is hard to believe that you have not simply chosen a position and stuck to it, being unamenable to any points I made.

You cite the president of Turkey. That article was written by other people. If no-one bothered to put in a pronunciation guide, that has no bearing on the corresponding article we are discussing. It is obvious that a guide could be added to the Turkish article if someone just did it, like so many things that can be included in an article. Wikipedia articles are assembled like a quilt from many contributions. They are not all alike, in terms of structure or content. So referring to the Turkish article doesn't strengthen your objections at all.

The Turkish article contains no IPA spelling. Please answer this direct question: do you intend, therefore, to delete the IPA guide from the President of Ireland article to preserve your consistency, using the Turkish article you chose to cite as a template of how things should be done?

I don't propose to insert pronunciation guides into all articles that could used them. So what? You know it is an unreasonable question: there are too many of them. Your question is so unreasonable as to be close to sarcasm.

You say my guide (with unnecessarily sneering inverted commas) won't help anyone. That is a thin claim which is just your personal opinion; just for fun, let's call that original research. You see how childish this insult trading is? I ask you to stop it. Read the article on pronunciation spelling: it documents how such spellings are widely regarded as helpful, whatever you personal opinion. Another article in Wikipedia shows how to do it. Snappy, if pronunciation spellings are as useless as you claim, why do so many respected dictionaries use them?

You repeat that a sound file is the ultimate solution, but I have already addressed that and you have not responded to what I said on that score. I wonder are you open to true discussion, or just repetition of points already made and refuted?

I saw a few pronunciation guides to saying the name of the Icelandic volcano. When I heard the name spoken on the radio, I was impressed by how close my understanding of the sound was from the pronunciation spellings. Your mileage may vary.

A sound file is a media file which is slow loading on some connections, and you did not have anything to say about older browsers, or simple courtesy. You did not answer my point that you can have a pronunciation guide, too.

You say my guide offers people "a slightly closer approximation of the actual pronunciation". Now you know that "slightly" is false: compared to the almost Arabic-looking IPA [ˈuəxt̪ˠəɾˠɑːn̪ˠ n̪ˠə ˈheːɾʲən̪ˠ], readers have a considerably clearer idea of how to pronounce things from the pronunciation spelling. You cannot credibly claim otherwise without making yourself seem stubborn. All readers of English can pronounce OOK and therawn and na and HAY and run. I bet you can do it too. Are you seriously telling me you can't? Seriously? They are so simple. Join them together, and there you have it. I note you did not have an answer to my question asking which component of that is a problem.

Indeed, you had no counter arguments to most of the points I made. That is clear because you avoided most of what I said. You let most of the points I made go unrefuted. That implies that they still stand as valid arguments you were unable to dismiss.

All you did was avoid most of what I said and raised new objections which are weak, as my refutations above demonstrate.

Please do not insult me or use a petty tone in your replies. You put the word guide in inverted commas in a cheap attempt to discredit it. I offer a guide, not a "guide". You posed a question so unreasonable as to be close to sarcasm. Your claim that you cannot understand pronunciation spellings designed to help you say a volcano's name does you little credit, and does not square with the realities demonstrated in the Wikipedia articles on pronunciation spellings, which obviously work for many people. Young children are taught language using pronunciation spelling as a tool. Dictionaries use them. They work.

I addressed you civilly and seriously. I am trying to resolve this amicably. Please do me the courtesy of addressing the points I made and questions I asked. If you ignore them they simply remain as valid arguments against your rather weak objections, which I have answered. I demonstrated inconsistencies and self contradictions in your argument: your decision not to acknowledge and address these identified inconsistencies is revealing.

I invited you to take a couple of days to mull things over because your original objections seemed, in my opinion, to be hasty reactions (Snappy) rather than carefully considered arguments. You are not obliged to reflect, of course. --O'Dea (talk) 21:58, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I see you've just repeated your verbose arguments, this time in a more sneering tone, therefore there it would appear that there is no more point to this discussion. Since you appear to be easily offended, I won't say any more lest you will be really offended. Btw, I don't need a definition of my own username, I know what it means because I choose it! Snappy (talk) 18:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Dates

Where have I done it? I was conscious of your advice and thought I was keeping it. Fergananim (talk) 15:32, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

James Douglas

Thanks for taking the trouble to fix article title and links. Mea culpa. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 21:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

No worries, it is a collaborative effort after all! Snappy (talk) 17:38, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, would you be so kind as to give us support!

Hello, I hope you're doing fine and I sincerely apologize for this intrusion. I've just read your profile and I would dare say that you're an Irishman (I wish I can visit your wonderful country some time soon!), so can you understand what are a minorized language and culture and maybe I am not bothering you and you will help us... (even if you're not Irish being a citizen of the Earth should make you feel sympathetic to our cause...). I'm a member of a Catalan association "Amical de la Viquipèdia" which is trying to get some recognition as a Catalan Chapter but this hasn't been approved up to that moment. We would appreciate your support, visible if you stick this on your first page: Wikimedia CAT. Supporting us will be like giving equal opportunity to minorized languages and cultures in the future! Thanks again, wishing you a great summer, take care! Slán agat (well, if you're Irish)! Capsot (talk) 20:46, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.es.001.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.es.001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:50, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 21:23, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations !

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	I hereby award you this Working Wikipedian's Barnstar for your numerous edits to Irish politics and election articles. They're really appreciated ! Claritas § 18:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Much appreciated. Snappy (talk) 18:50, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Future contributions to the page of Jim Higgins MEP

Could you kindly desist from removing relevant information form the page of Jim Higgins MEP for Ireland North West. Recent contributions on your behalf have removed large amounts of information not only relating to the public representative in question but also to the work he undertakes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thejackodonnell (talk • contribs) 09:42, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

No idea, what you're on about. Snappy (talk) 16:45, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

In that case I would be happy to talk further with you on the matter and explain in detail the problems your edits pose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thejackodonnell (talk • contribs) 10:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Barony in lead.

The purpose of the inclusion of the barony is not to give a pretended legal validity to the barony, it is to assist the reader in identifying the location. This can often be very important for the smaller entities where townlands of the same name exist in the same county: only the barony can distinguish them. So they serve a useful purpose in the descending order of geographical hierarchy which you yourself commend. You'll note that in all cases where I use it, I give the triple explanation from barony to county to state, in decreasing degrees of specificity. This is particularly useful for those readers pursuing genealogical research from overseas. In many cases, the records from Ellis Island, for example, will include the barony. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Eddie Filgate

Hi, I was wondering what your source was for this edit. Just curious to know if he's really still living. Canadian Paul 15:36, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

The Oireachtas members database, which is usually quite accurate lists him as living. [6]. He is 94 y/o, which is not unusual. Do you have any evidence to suggest he is deceased? Snappy (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Nope, not at all, I was just trying to figure out if "living" or "possibly living" was a better category, but I think that "living" is the better choice here. Canadian Paul 20:02, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

According to the Oireachtas historical debates, he was living in 1997 [7], since then I couldn't find anything. However, in my experience, in Ireland if a former member of parliament dies, there is usually a mention in the house of the death and condolences etc. There is nothing in the records which suggests (but does not prove) he is still alive. Snappy (talk) 22:05, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Trevor Sargent TD, birth date

Hi there,

Please do not change Trevor Sargent's date of birth. The correct date is 26 July 1960. The Oirecahtas database has until now, shown the incorrect date but should now be correct.

Thanks for taking the time to keep the entry correct; you were not to know that your source was incorrect.

Regards,

Lorcan O'Toole PA to Trevor Sargent TD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lorcanotoole (talk • contribs) 13:48, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

We use Oireachtas members db as a source on wikipedia because it is (usually) reliable, though not infallible. We do not take the word of some randomer claiming to be working for Trevor Sargent. I suggest you contact the odb administrators and supply them with proof so they can change it. If they change it, then the article can be modified. Snappy (talk) 17:44, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

RfA

I've addressed your comments on my RfA. Like I state, I was unaware of the previous compromise (and admittedly, should have checked) as for the Ireland politic stub template. Apologies. Connormah (talk | contribs) 15:05, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation. I've left a comment at the RfA. I've changed my stance to Neutral. Do I need to strikethrough the original oppose and/or physically move it to the Neutral section? Snappy (talk) 15:15, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Yep, that is the standard thing. If you like, I'll do it for you. Hobit (talk) 10:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

If you wouldn't mind, Thanks. Snappy (talk) 10:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Done! Let me know of any problems. Hobit (talk) 12:10, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Can you not read?

So smart arse, your asking me what part of non-free images blah blah blah don't I understand? Amazingly you removed the pictures from this page but refused to removing them from the other wiki pages. COULD THIS BE BECAUSE YOU ARE STUCK UP YOUR OWN ARSE? AnD WhO EvEn TYpes IN CAPs uNLeSs I hIT A nERvE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.125.111.194 (talk) 10:20, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.200.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.200.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:27, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.001.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.001.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Are there objective template size guidelines?

Re: Your reversions of my extensive and very time-consuming work:

• Template:Regional Roads Ireland
• Template:Regional Roads Ireland1
• Template:Regional Roads Ireland2
• Template:Regional Roads Ireland3
• Template:National roads in Ireland

It took me hours to derive the list of all 670 different regional road names from government documentation for inclusion in a comprehensive template. Are there, in Wikipedia, objective template size guidelines that would save us both from debate? --O'Dea (talk) 15:28, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, you many have spent hours doing this, but you were duplicating work I already in Oct 2008 when I created the template - see here. After creating the template, I split it in 3 for readability reasons because a template with nearly 700 links in one big list, is not at all readable. There are no guidelines to say what size a template should be, so it is a subjective thing, and you might think a 700 link template is quite readable. I have never come across a template of such size on wikipedia, have you? I can see merit and logic in having all the links in one template, and so a sensible compromise solution would be to have sub groups, like this template Template:Ireland topics. Snappy (talk) 16:04, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and modified the template Regional Roads Ireland to be a navbox with collapsible groups, and have redirected the other RR templates to it. I hope you agree with this compromise. Btw, you shouldn't have added the list of Regional Roads to the Template:National Roads in Ireland., that template it for National roads only not Regional roads. Snappy (talk) 16:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I like your compromise solution; it works very well and seems to satisfy both our desires.

It provides a revealing overview both to readers and to Wikipedians to see the entirety of the regional network at a glance: it is instructive to the general reader, and it highlights in one view to the Wikipedia editor what has, and has not, been written about, to date.

The reason I added regional roads to the template called Template:National roads in Ireland is that it appears on the pages it is used in with the title Roads in Ireland (not National), a different labelling which suggests a more general meaning, which could easily include regional roads.

If time allows, I would like to research the template coding that would be necessary to combine these two templates: Template:National roads in Ireland and Template:Regional Roads Ireland, using your recent solution of offering three unobtrusive (hidden) breakdowns of the regional roads.

The potential benefit I propose would be to offer a commanding overview of the entire road network in one place (omitting the thousands of local "L" roads), but initially hidden so as not to overwhelm the reader, and with the regional roads divided in three, as you have done.

If I research the coding necessary (a fairly big "if") and cobble together an integrated road network template under the umbrella rubric Roads in Ireland, I would do so in my sandbox and invite your opinion of the result before replacing the existing one. Who knows, it may be unwieldy and impractical, but I would like to experiment with it to find out. --O'Dea (talk) 00:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

That seems like a good idea. Let me know when you have finished it in your sandbox. Snappy (talk) 18:43, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.010.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.010.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

That's a kick-arse template, now.

I like the new Roads in Ireland template. I threw a few small corrections at the Regional roads template this morning so those amendments were incorporated. Nice job. --O'Dea (talk) 19:26, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Snappy (talk) 20:05, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Frank Fahey

Snappy, do you work for Frank Fahey? What issue do you have with the correct professional description of Frank Fahey, multimillionaire property developer and FF TD? If you check the register of interests at http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0313/Members%20Interest.pdf you will see that he owns an extensive network of property in Ireland and abroad, so the description that I have attempted to place on this site in not incorrect. What is your problem with this??? This is a reported FACT. I will continue to pursue this untiul such time as a correct professional description is applied to this businessman and (soon-to-be-former) politician. SP —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stroke Politics (talk • contribs) 09:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

And I will continue to revert it as what you are putting in is WP:SYNTHESIS or drawing your own conclusions, definitely not a FACT! His extensive property portfolio is already documented in the article, there is no evidence that he is a millionaire. A person can own property in this economic climate and be mortgaged and in debt up to their eyeballs, have you heard of Ivor Callely? Many Oireachtas members have property portfolios but their main occupation goes in the lead. Snappy (talk) 10:26, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Regional road article nominated for deletion

I have been building stubs for regional roads, particularly around Dublin, for now, in the R800 series. One of these, the R830, has been nominated for deletion, and the proposer has noted that this is one of many, so I imagine he may have set his sights on making a test case so he can propose deleting all the regional articles. I was thinking yesterday that perhaps my stubs, inviting potential enrichment by others, were vulnerable to deletion proposals on notability grounds. I was about to continue up to R843 to complete all the Regionals in County Dublin, but I will stop until this deletion proposal has been resolved. It is time consuming and I won't waste time on stubs that may be deleted. What do you think? The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R830 road. --O'Dea (talk) 11:09, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

I think the Regional roads are notable but there are no notability guidelines for roads only this proposal Wikipedia:Notability (streets, roads, and highways), so then WP:GNG applies. I've commented at the deletion discussion and added it to Ireland and transportation discussions. Snappy (talk) 11:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. I will sit back and see what else comes whirring out of the hedgerows. --O'Dea (talk) 22:35, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Larry Murphy

Hello again. hope you're keeping well? I'm sure you know this guy, I was thinking of starting an article on him but wanted to get your opinion (and a few more users). I believe he is notable on the basis that his early release is stimulating debate on sentence remission and how sex offenders are dealt with. What do you think? I don't want to write what could be a large enough article only to have it AFD'ed. GainLine ♠ _♥ 09:33, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Baronies detail: revsions pending outcome.

You actually went through all my contributions to revert them? How petty. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

No, just thorough, you reverted my change to Carrick-on-Shannon with a comment saying no changes should be until the outcome of the discussion. Then you go ahead and make changes. Why is it one rule for me and another for you? Everyone abides by the same rules, anything else is the height of hypocrisy. Snappy (talk) 19:29, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Finglas

I'm happy with the reversion. Forgot that the DCC border takes such a northerly swing. Should the article not refer to DCC instead of the vernacular Northside or Dublin city though? Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:09, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it should refer to DCC as well. Snappy (talk) 13:58, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.100.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.100.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:49, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Surnames

Hi Snappy. What all those people have in common is an origin from County Galway, hence denoting some blood relationship, however distant. This is particularly true in the case of surnames such as Broderick, which are uncommon, small in number and mostly found in particular areas. However, I do take your point. Fergananim (talk) 19:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Mary

Hi Snappy, You made a revert to my edit. I made the edit as I read the references and found no evidence that her family were forced out of the Ardoyne by loyalists. Can you show me where in the reference this is stated? thank you.Factocop (talk) 16:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I added a new reference, please read it. Snappy (talk) 22:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Please revert form deleting true statements from Mary Coughlans page. Selective deleting is unfair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.46.134.246 (talk) 20:12, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering...

Who is Marcella? RashersTierney (talk) 21:05, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

In the diffs for the Spire [8], it says ':/Users/marcella/Desktop/spire.jpg', so thats who they are! Snappy (talk) 21:33, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Got ya! I spotted that earlier...and forgot it again! RashersTierney (talk) 21:49, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Where should I post a notice concerning an Ireland-related discussion?

At some point in the past, you broadened a discussion on a Talk page by listing the discussion somewhere else, I forget where, to draw a wider debate. There is now a discussion about whether to delete the Template:British Isles and I'd like to draw it to the attention of Irish Wikipedians. Where can I alert others about it? Thank you. --O'Dea (talk) 20:19, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Post a link to it at the Irish Wikipedians notice board talk page which is at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland. Snappy (talk) 20:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you; I did it. --O'Dea (talk) 21:26, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect ref. to cats

You rv. two cat edits allegedly by me (19th & 20th Century Irish people). I never put anyone into those cats, so pls. avoid refs to me, thanks. Greets Osioni (talk) 09:35, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Correction, I now see you reverted to former rev. by me, forgive me for for making a stupid uproar !! Osioni (talk) 09:40, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad that's cleared up! Snappy (talk) 10:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Removal of cats

Hi, could you explain what is behind your removal of cats such as "19th-century people" or whatever, or point me to where this is explained. I don't disagree, I just don't know why it's being done. Ta, Hohenloh ⁺ 02:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

For the category 20th-century Irish people, it quites clearly states: "Due to the scope of this category, it should only contain subcategories and possibly a limited number of directly related pages." I was depopulating this category and may have removed some of the 19th-century Irish people as well, which does not explicitly state what the 20th-century does. Snappy (talk) 07:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Comment

I am sick and tierd of what you are doing with me. I am the person who is trying to make some articals nicer. I request that you stop it befoe I take futher action.

I am the person who is trying to make changes to articals. You sent me a warning 15 minuits ago. Could you just please leave me be and I am not trying to vandilise wikipedia, I am only trying to make some articals better —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctscctscctsc (talk • contribs) 14:57, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

All I am trying to say is could you lease leave me alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctscctscctsc (talk • contribs) 14:58, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I will use the sandbox to make sure my changes are better. Now will you leave me alone —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctscctscctsc (talk • contribs) 15:01, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Could you please leave my change alone if I use the sandbox —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctscctscctsc (talk • contribs) 15:12, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

If I make helpful changes will you stop changing them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctscctscctsc (talk • contribs) 15:23, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

IF I MAKE HELPFUL CHANGES IN THE FUTERE WILL YOU LEAVE THEM ALONE ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctscctscctsc (talk • contribs) 15:28, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

sorry, i forgot but i think the end result was helpful —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctscctscctsc (talk • contribs) 15:59, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

why did you change my changes in Politics of the Republic of Ireland —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctscctscctsc (talk • contribs) 16:05, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

most other countries have a picture of there head of state on there equilvant artical —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctscctscctsc (talk • contribs) 16:12, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

what's an artical ? Snappy (talk) 16:15, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

why dont you put the dep. of education logo on it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctscctscctsc (talk • contribs) 16:32, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Joe Conway contested

Greetings! An article you proposed for deletion in July, Joe Conway, was recently restored via a request for undeletion. You may want to review the article to determine if deletion is still in order, in which case it would need to be nominated at WP:AFD. —C.Fred (talk) 07:19, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Rónán Mullen

Hi, it may have escaped your notice that the above article is undergoing revuew. I have asked for improvements to the lead but you keep removing material, here and here. This is not very helpful. The review is at Talk:Rónán Mullen/GA1. If you wish to comment, please do so there. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:30, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

An Ghaeilge

'the IMF is in town, but someone are still obsessed with Irish!.'(sic) Ya cos' like as everyone knows you aren't aloud protect your culture cos' the IMF is here. O wait no that has nothing to do with it. So no more edits on any articles till the IMF are gone then? 193.1.172.163 (talk) 17:46, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll take it that English is not your first language then, given that incoherent, ungrammatical, baldy spelt rant. Btw, It's allowed not aloud (sic). As for the IMF, the Dáil spent 90 minutes discussing it, then spent the rest of the day debating the future of the Irish language. What a bunch of muppets! Snappy (talk) 18:27, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Pat Rabbitte's resignation speech

Hi Snappy. The restoration that you attempted of the Pat Rabbitte resignation speech at RTÉ.ie was actually a link to a report of the resignation, not the text of the speech itself, so I have corrected the title of the link at Pat Rabbitte. Previously — prior to my original edit today — the link to RTÉ was to the text of the speech, but that is now a dead link. I hope you enjoyed his outburst on Thursday, but as superficially amusing at it was, it was at least two years too late. — O'Dea 23:21, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

3rr

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Irish general election, 2011. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Lihaas (talk) 23:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Well talk about the pot calling the kettle black! Firstly, I have not violated 3RR, if I have please show me where? Secondly, I have discussed it on the talk page, before you left this message. Thirdly, it takes two to edit war. Fourthly, you could have tried to reply on the talk page instead leaving vaguely threatening (but incorrect) messages on my talk page, which isn't very constructive. Fifthly, you haven't replied to my arguments on the talk page. Sixthly, I'm here everyday editing Irish political articles, trying to improve them; while you don't seem to share that outlook. Seventhly, I see you've been blocked several times before for incivility and edit warring, but I'm not sure if you've learned anything from these blocks. Try and edit constructively, instead of being so confrontational. Snappy (talk) 08:03, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Apologies there

Apologies there about one of my edits to the Donegal South West by election. Completely unintentional there. Oh and Ann Sweeney has withdrawn just to let you know. Exiledone (talk) 21:42, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

No Worries. It does seem a bit pointless now with a GE in the New Year. Snappy (talk) 21:45, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

True but it'll be a very good indicator about how FF are doing in what would have previously been considered their heartland. Exiledone (talk) 21:25, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Sunday Business Pos contested

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from The Sunday Business Pos, which you proposed for deletion, because the page you proposed for deletion was not an article. If you still think the page should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to it, as proposed deletion is only for articles. Instead, consider using WP:RFD for this page. In some cases, a speedy deletion criterion may apply. Thanks!

Nah, couuldn't be bothered, it can stay! Snappy (talk) 17:40, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Biased editing of Technological Utopianism by Loremaster.

Biased editing of Technological Utopianism by Loremaster.

Due to your past contribution to Technological utopianism, you may currently want to help editing the Technological utopianism article because currently only one editor is contributing to the article. The Singularitarianism Article could also benefit from your help.

I feel Loremaster is editing Singularitarianism and Technological utopianism in a biased manner in accordance with his Save The Earth propaganda. Loremasters's ideology seems to verge towards Neo-Luddism. Here are the damming facts Loremaster has stated in discussion:

Loremaster says he is:

"...critical of techno-utopianism in all its forms."

Loremaster wants people to:

"...stop indulging in techno-utopian fantasies... ...so that we can all focus on energies on saving the planet."

Loremaster sees his editing as a 'fight' and he states:

"Although I am convinced that the world is in fact heading toward an ecological catastrophe, I think it can be averted and my optimism makes me want to fight to do do just that."

81.151.135.248 (talk) 12:23, 18 December 2010 (UTC)JB

1. LOL
2. Despite the fact that I openly admit to being a technorealist who is critical of techno-utopianism in all its forms, I have let never this point of view influence any of my edits or reverts of the Technological utopianism or Singularitarianism articles. On the contrary, I am the person most responsible for expanding the former article with content some would argue is “pro-techno-utopian” (i.e. passages from James Hughes' book Citizen Cyborg).
3. I find it disgusting that 81.151.135.248 would take comments I made out of context to falsely make it seem I see my editing of any article as part of my fight for the environment.
4. In light of this outrageous act of bad faith, I will do everything in my power to get this jerk banned from Wikipedia.

--Loremaster (talk) 00:57, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I am NOT interested in this discussion. Please do not post here again about it. Snappy (talk) 17:40, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Amen ...

... to that! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Agreed! Snappy (talk) 22:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Adminship

Snappy, it just occurred to me to ask something I have thought of a few tines before.

Would you accept a nomination for adminship?

The WP:RFA process tends to be fairly tough these days, but I think you'd stand a good chance. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:55, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the consideration BHG, but I don't think its for me. I've looked at RFA process and it seems like alot of people going through your edit history with a fine toothcomb, and asking you to justify them, which is something I couldn't handle. I'll stick with being an ordinary editor. Snappy (talk) 19:53, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear that, Snappy, but I'm not surprised. RFA has gotten way out of hand, and while I really do think that you'd get through, I can well understand that you'd prefer to avoid the bruising you might take on the way.

However, your understandable reluctance reinforces my growing feeling that there is now a systemic problem with the pathways to adminship. There are lots of editors like yourself with a long track-record in building content and sorting out the disagreements which arise along the way, while upholding policy. Something's badly broken when editors like that expect a roasting if they let their names go forward :( --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:09, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

"Bias"

A little paranoid I think. I won't deny that there are some editors who I believe should be banned from using the site, but you aren't one of them. Number 57 21:14, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps on reflection, I was paranoid. Maybe, I was thinking of an old edit war I had with you. I therefore withdraw my allegations and apologise for calling you biased. Snappy (talk) 21:18, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Hoisted by your own petard indeed :) Number 57 21:39, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

H-block candidates, and others

Hi Snappy

I see that in these two edits [9] and [10] you reverted a change from "Independent" to "h-block" in the affiliation of candidates.

Since no ref was provided in either case, you were quite right to do ... but even with a ref, this is not a simple question. The electoral laws in Ireland at the time were rigid: either a candidate was nominated by a registered political party, or they were labelled on the ballot paper simply as a "non-party candidate". (I dunno whether this is still the case). So whatever label any of the H-block candidates used for their campaigning, they all appeared on the ballot as "non-party candidate", which we usually represent in election boxes as "independent".

It seems to me that:

1. the editor who added "H-block" was probably right about how the candidates labelled themselves, which is also how they would have been referred to in the media.
2. We do need a ref before we can use that fact (which is why I support your reverts), but ...
3. Once a ref is found, we need to find some way of conveying the fact that these candidates had two difft labels, one a self-description, and the other on the ballot. I suggest that the best way to do this would be label them in the list of candidates using their own self-description, but add a footnote about how they appeared on the ballot.

Note that this does not just affect the H-block candidates. In Nov 1982, Roger Garland is listed in Dublin South as an Ecology Party candidate. This is technically wrong, because while he was the Ecology party candidate, the party was unregistered, so he was on the ballot as "non-pary". ElectionsIreland has not got to grips with this: it labels Garland as Ecology Party,[11] but in Wicklow Liam de Suin was also an EP candidate, but is labelled as independent.[12]. Similar issues apply to the other Nov 192 Ecology Party candidates: Maire Mullarney in Dublin South-East,[13] Richard Power in Limerick East[14], Owen Casey in Cork North-central[15], and 2 others who names I forget.

Any thoughts? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:42, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

There is a difference alright between self description and what appeared on a ballot paper. The question is, do we stick rigidly to what was on the ballot paper (eg. Independent) or go with what was probably on all posters and literature in the candidates campaign (e.g. Free Cheese Party). On balance, its probably better to have what was on the ballot paper in the results table (so it is factually accurate) and as you suggest to have a footnote explaining, that said Independent candidate actually campaigned under the self applied banner of Free Cheese Party. Also, you're right about ElectionsIreland.org (excellent reference site for the most part) is a bit haphazard/unreliable in this area. Snappy (talk) 01:03, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

There's an interesting issue of sourcing here, which seems to be reflected in the inconsistencies in the generally-excellent ElectionsIreland.org.

I did a little more burrowing, and found that the registration of parties was introduced in S.13 of the Electoral Act, 1963, so until that point, presumably free-form descriptions were permitted, as happened in the UK until the 1990s.

I then recalled that I had a good printed source on this stuff: Brian M. Walker, ed. (1992). Parliamentary election results in Ireland 1918–1992. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy. ISBN 0-901714-96-9. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: checksum (help) On page 99, Walker explains his sourcing. There were no official printed returns for Dail elns until the Kerry South by-eln in Nov 1944. Up to June 1927, Walker uses local newspapers; from Sep 27 to the 1944ge he uses Flynn's guides, and thereafter the official returns. He says that there is a lot of difficulty in 43 and 44 in distinguishing Farmers from Clann na Talmhan candidates, and that after 63 party affiliations for candidates of unregistered parties were either described as "non-party" or not described at all, and I see that is reflected in his table. Walker says that "where helpful, additional information on these candidates has been given in square brackets", and the only example I found in Nov 1982 was Neil Blaney being labeled as [Ind FF].. However, looking at the 1981 general election, I see "[H-block]" beside the following:

• Kieran Doherty in Cavan–Monaghan (Walker, page 237)
• Mairéad Farrell in Cork North-Central (Walker, page 238)
• Vincent Doherty in Dublin North-Central (Walker, page 239)
• Patrick Healey in Dublin North-East (Walker, page 239)
• Anthony O'Hara in Dublin West (Walker, page 241)
• Martin Hurson in Longford–Westmeath (Walker, page 243)
• Patrick Agnew in Louth (Walker, page 243)
• Joseph McDonnell in Sligo–Leitrim (Walker, page 244)

It seems to me that since Walker is the most scholarly source we are likely to find for coverage of Dail elections as a whole, that we should adopt that format, with a footnote. That's kind of a reversal of your approach, but it seems to me to better reflect how such candidates were described in the campaign and in the media, which I think is the approach implied by the spirit of WP:COMMONNAME.

Would you be OK with that? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:46, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Well done on the research, very thorough! Yes, I agree with your proposed approach, its better to go with how candidates were described/known as in the media/campaign. Btw, I'm sure you mean ANTI H-Block candidates. ;-) Snappy (talk) 12:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to but in here but from what I've read I don't think Vincent Doherty had the backing of the Anti H-Block committe to run in Dublin North Central. He was a member of Bernadette McAliskey's group, Peoples Democracy but from what I read in the Magill article he wasn't formally backed. He isn't referred to in Sweeney's book or on the other link. I do know Tom McAllister ran in Clare (INLA - IRSP). Exiledone (talk) 12:29, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

That's ok, but lets continue this discussion on the relevant page at Talk:Anti H-Block. Snappy (talk) 12:35, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.050.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.050.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 08:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.020.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.020.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 08:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.005.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.005.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 08:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.002.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eurocoin.ee.s1.002.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 08:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Ireland banner

Hi Snappy

I just spotted this edit and a bunch of similar ones on my watchlist, which added the {{WikiProject Ireland category}} to category talk pages.

Good work tagging them ... but just thought I'd point out that {{WikiProject Ireland category}} is no longer a separate banner, and redirects to {{WikiProject Ireland}}. That's because since the adoption in early 2008 of the meta-template {{WPBannerMeta}}, the basic banner is now a mighty clever thing which does not need to be specifically told that it is has been applied to a category.

Don't waste your energy altering these, but for future reference it's now better to use {{WikiProject Ireland}}. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:26, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know that. Thanks for pointing it out. Snappy (talk) 17:51, 27 December 2010 (UTC)