Jump to content

User talk:Sarah777/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Welcome

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Great to see another editor adding to Ireland-related articles here (you might want to check out the Irish Wikipedians' notice board where editors collaborate on Ireland-related articles). Nice photos. I see you have one or two images uploaded without a licence - this isn't a problem that requires you to re-upload, you can edit the page for an image (e.g. Image:IMG 1775w.jpg) in the same way any article here is edited. This means you can amend your details about the photos, authorship, and add the licence template even after the image is created here on Wikipedia.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

  • You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
  • If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
  • You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
  • If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the Articles for deletion page. There is also a Deletion review page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

zoney ♣ talk 10:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Great contributions

Hi there,

Great to have some photos - Wikipedia often has problems with plenty of text and no images (or poor ones). The ones you've added are great illustrations, particularly the ones of new road sections. You must travel around a fair bit! Also nice to have someone else editing and fact-checking the articles.

zoney ♣ talk 09:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I don't really know how to communicate here...as you can see!


Changing image tags/descriptions

Hi there,

You don't need to re-upload your images to fix the tag or details attached to the image. Just go to the image's page (e.g. Image:IMG_3994w.JPG) and click "edit this page" at the top. Just add whatever tag you want there (e.g. {{GFDL}} or {{PD}}).

Hope that helps,

zoney ♣ talk 09:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


Hello Zoney That works fine; it tells me to use "PD-self". Regards Eoghan (Sarah777)


Photos

I would just like to compliment and thank you on your brilliant photos. They are a great contribution to Wikipedia! Jvlm.123 15:23, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! Glad you like them...this Wikipedia thing is addictive, isn't it?!


Halloween img

Although it is a very pretty picture, maybe it's one of your family that you have taken yourself. Ireland is very well presented with an 1832 painting. Maybe one is enough, as Halloween photos are more or less the same worldwide, but the painting is interesting because of it's historical nature. BTW, Halloween originated in Ireland and was brought to the USA in the 1850's. Well I see nearly every country is claiming it now. I don't remember it being celebrated here in England when I was a kid. Gal Lass 20:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Gail, Nothing to do with my family, I have no idea who the kids were! I did take the picture a few years back, I've contributed dozens of pics to Wiki. I agree the Blarney picture is excellent but the article lacked an illustration of the most typical MODERN aspect of Halloween, the dressing up and begging or 'trick and treating' as they call it in America, (a phrase which has now become the standard here).

I felt the photo captured this, the kids dressed up just after dark, the 'Haloween colours' of black and orange, the Autumn leaves on the trees and the ghoulish decorations on the house in the background!

I even thought the sequence of the two pics was illustrative; Haloween Ireland 1832 and now today. Regards (Sarah777 22:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC))

ATHLONE

Icarns; the climate data in the "Athlone" article is WRONG. Why did you delete my note pointing that out? (Sarah777 15:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC))

Hello Sarah777. I removed it since the article is not the place to carry on discussions. This should have been highlighted one of (at least) two methods:
  1. A new discussion entry on Talk:Athlone if there was something to discuss
  2. A correction of the data in the article together with a reference citing your source of statistics.
You should sign Talk comments, but not article edits. As it was, I was following a Wiki task list that had highlighted incorrect links to User space from the article space, and your Athlone signature / comments were so highlighted. Hope that explains things. Please feel free to re-edit in one of the above ways. Thanks, Ian Cairns 16:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

OK. Got that! Unfortunately while I know for certain the climate data for Athlone is incorrect, I don't know a source of any correct data. It isn't one of the Irish Met Service locations. (Sarah777 02:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC))

British Isles template

I left you a message on the British Isle template talk page --sony-youthtalk 23:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Sony, never sure where to reply in these situations! I now understand what you have in mind for the template - very good. Regards (Sarah777 00:10, 19 December 2006 (UTC)) 

Finnea

AFD for Littleton, County Tipperary debate located at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Littleton, County Tipperary.

It seems I nominated this article in error, too quickly. Apoligies. I have closed this debate with a speedy keep. Also, it does not appear this article was blocked (protected) so any editing errors were probably caused by the internet somehow. Your edits look great. Happy editing. Navou talk 02:16, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Navou - and Happy Christmas to you too!! Regards (Sarah777 03:14, 23 December 2006 (UTC))

    • I have edited the article to remove the AFD notice. The AFD is closed so I removed the notice. A copy of the debate is linked from the articles talk page. If you add the notice again, I will not revert it, however, it will be incorrectly placed.Navou talk 03:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:AFD

You wrote:Shouting? Come again please?

Yes, as in adding WORDS IN CAPITALS - universally an indication of shouting in email and web-based writing. And also as in adding inappropriately large headers within an afd - level two and three headers (now both corrected) where no headers were needed - or if any had been put in, level four were the largest that should have been used.

And "What has your list of contributions got to do with anything?". Please try to remain civil yourself, sir. What do you think they might have to do with anything?

Nothing uncivil in that - it's just a statement of puzzlement, since I don't think it'd got anything to do with it whatsoever. It doesn't matter whether you've made one edit or a hundred thousand edits - it's no indication at all of whether your next contribution will be one worthy of keeping. The first thing I wrote that was nominated for AFD came after I'd made over 50,000 edits. There's very little correlation at all between thether an article should be on AFD and the article creator's edit history.

And you reckon "Happy Christmas" is a hostile remark? What country are you from?

No, I reckon that "Would yo PLEASE get rid of whatever block you are operating. I'm trying to compose an article" is hostile, especially since no one had instigated any blocks. I also reckon that "Could you not check my list of CONTRIBUTIONS before chopping???? This is tiresome." is hostile, especially since no-one had done any "chopping" - quite the opposite in fact, I actually added information to the article by providing further location details and an external link. And New Zealand, FWIW. Grutness...wha? 02:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Grutness - Happy Christmas, OK?! (Sarah777 03:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC))

  • I'm confused, is any of this addressed to me? After re-reading, I see its not, too much coffee I had tonight.Navou talk

Horse and Jockey

Hi Will! I see you put my pics down the right-hand side of the stub rather than across the top. Normally when I don't have much to say about a village I put the pics across as it looks neater; I guess your format is kinda begging for some text!! Regards (Sarah777 04:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC))

I did it because the images were overlapping. I saw no way to fix that. Sorry. Will (Talk - contribs) 04:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Just been informed that in MS Explorer the pics across the top style doesn't work (I use Firefox) - why is that ??! (Sarah777 04:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC))

I don't know. Try asking at Wikipedia:Village Pump (technical). Will (Talk - contribs) 04:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

"borebkole"

Hi from Brisbane, Australia, where, thank the divinity of your choice, the weather is actually fit for human habitation for once (it's cold and rainy).
This is a bit out of left field. Someone anonymous ("207.104.148.124" - no talk page) added something about "borebkole" to the "external links" [1] a little while ago. You then moved it up into the body of the article where it should have been. Since I can't ask Mr or Ms 207.104.148.124, I may as well start by asking you: have you ever heard of "borebkole"? I can't find it anywhere, and Google suggests it is a rather mean-looking kind of South African dog breed. I reckon it should be "boerenkool"; see this link. (I guess it could be a regional Dutch dialalect version, but I would have expected something more along the lines of "boerkole" or similar. Interesting languge, that, Dutch. Actualiy, in German (blah blah blah for about half an hour...)
Any thoughts? I might try the reference desk. Oo-roo.
--Shirt58 07:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

'G'day mate, howyagoin, orright' and so on, as we are expected to say. Yes, yes, yes, I know that you just moved the 'borebkole' thing into the body of the article, and the closest Google (oh lordy, the verbed noun has now a become a nouned verb, and I'm complicit in it) was 'Boerboel', that scary-looking cute ginger short-haired dog breed. But: no, no, no, I never suggested Dutch people eat anything remotely canine on Halloween. If anything ginger, they probably eat those yummy Speculaas spicy bikkies. They're really tasty crunched a bit and mixed (Speculaas, not Boerboels or Dutch people, that is) into vanilla ice-cream. And that's no hoax.
Asking about 'borebkole' on the Reference_desk/Miscellaneous right now. I'll keep you updated.
Bet Clio the Muse finds the answer.
--Shirt58 11:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Asked on the reference desk, and two fine folks replied. Seems I was right, apparently, about that 'Boerenkool' thingumy. I'm still kind of surprised that Clio the Muse wasn't the one answering it, tho.
Anyways: a million or so Fáilte, I think you have a lovely tea-shock, and, mmm, Éireann go Brách (as my grandmum used to say)... and all that sort of stuff.
--Shirt58 11:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Halloween

You wrote on my talk page: "Congrats to Walloon - Halloween must be one of the most regularly vandalised or contested (non political) articles on Wiki! Excellent stewardship!"

Could you explain what you mean by "stewardship"? I'm just one of dozens of editors of that article. I'm in the dark on what your message means. — Walloon 19:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC) (added comment from user page, feydey 19:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC))

Ireland#International_rankings

Hi, I removed the International Rankings section from Ireland because they would be better in the Republic of Ireland article, if the information has been properly sourced. Or, of course, if they have been calculated to include Northern Ireland, say in the island article. « Keith t/e» 15:27, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


OK...I can't seem to get them back in one piece anyway!(Sarah777 15:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC))

No probs, if you go to the last edit before I reverted, click edit, then copy the section into the Republic's article. That should work (fingers crossed!). « Keith t/e» 15:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I think the problem was the white space around some of the text, sorted now. « Keith t/e» 16:16, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Keith; I had figured it out and the 'rankings' section is now reassembled in the Republic of Ireland article. I checked the links and the stats do indeed refer only to the RoI; though it is usually just called 'Ireland' in the ranking compilations; so I've linked them back to the Republic of Ireland article. regards (Sarah777 16:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC))

Hollyford

Hi Sarah, I have edited some info you had on Hollyford, as it was incorrect. I am a local just in case you were wondering. I must say the photos used here does nothing for our village, hopefully when the work is finished in the village I will be able to help you out and add some nice ones. Out of interest how do you know Hollyford? Kelticdee 21:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello! Well, it was a very wet day and the entire village was dug up with some pipe-laying; and the sawmill does spill across the road! But, yes. In nice weather and without the works I could take much nicer pics of your charming village. I work in the hills of North Tipp from time to time - check out the stubs on Dundrum, Holycross etc.(Sarah777 21:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC))


Holy Cross Abbey

Hi Sarah! Thanks for your good work on the Holy Cross Abbey site - I have just expanded it a lot with historical background. Hope you like it! Best Seneschally 15:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Great stuff Seneschally! (Sarah777 00:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC))

Sally Gap

Cool picture of the Sally Gap [2]. One question though, did you drive up there in the snow? Pretty brave if so!

Regards Jdorney 01:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Beautiful place alright. The wicklow mountains in general are one of my favourite places. Must be dangerous descending from the gap in the snow? You're obviusly still in one piece though!

Jdorney 01:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Flags of Ireland

Hi Sarah, with regards to your recent edit summary, I was just wondering why you consider the Four Provinces Flag and the St. Patrick Saltire to be "spam" when added to the Ireland article? They are explicitly discussed in the text, so their inclusion seems to be entirely relevant. You'll have to forgive my obtuseness, but I'm slightly mystified as to how any possible definition of the word "spam" could be applied to their inclusion. Also, why is the "correct" order the one with the RoI flag at the top? I don't really have any preference in the matter, but I was just wondering why this is the case. Cheers, Martin 03:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

They clutter the article; perhaps the reference to them should be deleted too. I'll look into it. As for the order of the flags, I would have thought it obvious. Firstly, the Irish State has been robbed of the use of its official name, IRELAND, by certain Wiki editors; then there are repeated attempts to have the Union Jack appear as the top/largest/first flag to appear in the article titled IRELAND. Enough is enough as they say. The last time I edited the flags I had SonyYouth remove my edits and refer to them as "vandalism". Though they were factually correct. So 'spam' is mild. (Sarah777 18:32, 11 February 2007 (UTC))

Dundrum meteorite

As far as I know, part of the meteorite is in the Geology Department of Trinity College. If memory serves me right, it's most of the meteorite, with a chunk sawn off. According to this, it's in the Museum there now.

(There was also a a tiny bit for sale on eBay last month. Went for $28) Flowerpotman 23:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Phibsboro Vandal

I had noticed your valiant efforts to keep this article on track. Frankly, I am a day or two away from requesting semi-protection for the page. I have the page on my watch list so, between us perhaps we can keep it clean. Cheers! DSRH 03:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Ennis - subtle vandalism

Hi Sarah. I'm wondering if you'd be able to help me in preventing ongoing, subtle vandalism to the Ennis article, mainly by just putting it on your watchlist (if it's not there already) and reverting vandalism if you come across it.

Often the vandalism is pretty obvious, like this, but sometimes it's more subtle and it's not obvious even to me, such as this edit. It appears to me there is one person who is persistently trying to undermine the Ennis article by adding disinformation. Note that the vandal sometimes appears to be impersonating myself.

Before you suggest it, I have considered whether the article should be semi-protected. However, I dislike the "in-your-face" protection notice that gets slapped at the top of articles, and anyway the actual rate of vandalism is probably too low to be considered worthy of semi-protection.

Hoping you can help... cheers, A bit iffy 07:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

RE: Apologies Etcetera

Sarah, thanks. re: "Flag of Occupied Ireland (1800-1922)" being "historically accurate" - oh, come on! Funny edit, but please, come on! --sony-youthtalk 08:50, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Dundrum pix

Hi, how about some pix to illustrate the Dundrum entry? Suckindiesel 13:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

talk page

I would request that you clarify at talk:Republic of Ireland for the accusation, made by you, "I notice Djegan has reverted my edit a SECOND time without any discussion, definitely hostile and not in the spirit of Wiki." Amongst other things this second reversion of your edit, where is it? Djegan 14:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Sarah777, I must genuinely complement your ability to accuse. But I am waiting for evidence for said accusations on talk:Republic of Ireland and my user page. Djegan 23:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Flags of Ireland

Hi Sarah, thank you for your reply. Might I suggest in future that you leave more constructive edit summaries? Treating an editor's honest edits as "spam" simply because someone else did likewise to yours is not terribly helpful. As for the order of the flags, that it not obvious, so you might might like consider other possible viewpoints when editing. After all, the Union Flag is older than the RoI flag, and (rightly or wrongly), it did represent Ireland for over 100 years until 80 years ago or so. Again, I have no preference one way or the other, but if pushed I would think the RoI flag should go at the top, simply because it is geographically larger; this seems to me to be NPOV reasoning. I am just pointing out that there isn't necessarily a universally accepted "correct order". Remember, this is an article about the island, not the state. I'm not trying to be nasty, and I do personally appreciate your contributions, but you should always remember to assume good faith. We all want a good article, even though we may disagree how to achieve it. Take care, Martin 17:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Good luck with your Regional road series - I guess someone has to do it! :) Martin 23:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

minor edit

Minor edits don't need discussion, but the change you made is not a minor one. It implies that the description "Republic of Ireland" is incidental - that it is just one of many, with the same status as (say) "Emerald Isle". That simply isn't so. I'm not flatly contradicting you and I'm sure you made the edit in good faith, but you need to produce the evidence of other statutory descriptions. (I accept that this is not what the article actually says at the moment.) --Red King 00:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't really understand what you are saying here. Ireland/Éire is the constitional name, not just another description. Surely this is exactly the first thing you said on talk:RoI (and I agreed with you until I realised the can of worms it would open) - the name of the state is Ireland, RoI is just a description? Red King 23:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Red; they are BOTH names. One is the Constitutional (hence official) name; the other is described in an Act as a "description", though it is clearly no such thing, it is a name. (Sarah777 23:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC))

Sandyford Reservoir

Theres a reason why its called the Sandyford Reservoir. Its in Sandyford. The same way the Weirview drive possé claim to be living in Leopardstown and Weirview is closer to Stillorgan than the Sandyford reservoir. cheers--Play Brian Moore 16:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Weirview Drive is in Leopardstown. Dwellings situated on Brewery Road are not neccesarily (The Lep(Leopardstown) Inn pour l'example) situated in Stillorgan. I would like see some evidence for your sweeping statement Are not all entrances to the complex off roads which, according to An Post, are in Stillorgan. The reservoir is situated closer to the industrial estate than it is to Stillorgan. Take Sandyford Renault for example, changed from Stillorgan Renault to Sandyford Renault only recently. Same with Sandford reservoir. Cheers--Play Brian Moore 17:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Stillorgan is obviously in Stillorgan, Sandyford reservoir is obviously in Sandyford. Cheers--Play Brian Moore 00:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

You miss a crucial point here - it is NOT called Sandyford Reservoir - it is officially called Stillorgan reservoir!!! (Sarah777 01:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC))

Says who? (and dont say 'says me')--Play Brian Moore 01:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I'll go get a picture tomorrow. For now I leave you with this harrowing thought. The reservoir is in Snadyford, end quote.--Play Brian Moore 01:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Every little helps. Anyway, it's nearly 2AM and henceforth I couldn't be 'arsed' reading that whole debate but if it's about what the title suggest then all towns, whatever side of the border should simply be in Ireland. Goatstown is a town is South County Dublin, Ireland for example.--Play Brian Moore 01:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Ye, now I'm totally lost.--Play Brian Moore 02:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Hollywood, County Wicklow

Surely if the Hollywood USA page can speculate about the origin of their name, then so can Hollywood Wicklow. It is a commonly held opinion in Hollywood that the one in the USA is named after it, which is not unreasonable given the history of emigration from this country and the relative ages of the two areas. Also if the Hollywood USA page cannot definitively tell us where its name has come from, then how can you discount another possibility? Two of the external links are to websites with some history input on the village, and both claim this to be true.

Also, that photograph of Hollywood is probably the most unflattering image I have ever seen of the village, maybe I can take some better ones to replace it soon?

Hi there Anonymous Editor! I don't think unreferenced speculation is acceptable in the body of Wiki articles. If there was any truth in the storey of the man from Hollywood there would be some evidence, surely? Also the profusion of links is against the Wiki manual; facts should be clearly referenced from without the body of the article.

As for the photo, the 'Hollywood sign' angle is a very obvious one. (Why TWO of them - looks sloppy). We all differ in matters of taste but I'd say Hollywood was set in beautiful surroundings but the village is well represented by the photo; grubby and disorganised. It badly needs to be knocked into shape (see Grangecon for example). (Sarah777 02:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC))


Quite obviously there is no definitive answer to how Hollywood LA has been named, so surely all possibilities, however remote, must be entertained, I was only stating the fact that it was a local claim, and not that it was definitively true. The Hollywood LA page only publicises rumours too.

Secondly, it appears to me that you may have driven past hollywood, without turning up the cul de sac into the village itself. If this is the case, then I think you should come back and see what it is really like. Hollywood X 02:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I dont appreciate the fact that you appear to be making this personal. I wish to tell people about the place that I come from, and in figuring out how to work with wikipedia I have made some mistakes, however I am trying to make my text, which I believe to be highly relevant, suitable for inclusion. oh, and now i can sign my messages Hollywood X 03:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

have you no photos of the village itself, as opposed to road signs?

It was a dull day:

Hollywood from the hill above
Hollywood Village


They're much better, wouldn't they be more appropriate for use in the article? Hollywood X 03:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes it would! I have ditched the signs. btw you can insert any picture yourself by clicking on it and copying the Image Name on top and slotting it into the correct format, say "IMG_OldVillageHollywood4971w.jpg" is the name, add then

Write Caption

and up pops the image.

You can do this for ANY image on Wiki. (Sarah777 03:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC))


Road designations

Sarah777, can I ask with your road project, are the roads actually named as "N74 road" or just N74. I ask as the article titles seem confusing. Have you just named them with road afterwards because the initial N74 etc is occupied by a different article? If this is so then I think the articles should be moved to a more appropriate article name such as "N74 (road)" or "N74 (Ireland)". If this is the case then I can do this for you if you want, if no then the road portion of the name should be bolded as well in the article as N74 road. I hope I've managed to convey what I mean here. Ben W Bell talk 08:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Ben, the style of naming these articles is taken from the one established by zoney, who set up the whole structure and wrote most of the "roads" pages. I am merely expanding on his work - so I'd be very reluctant to change anything without his agreement!

The 'secondary' roads are a separate category from the ' primary', 'motorway' or 'regional' so I reckoned that a specific standardised style of infobox for each category would help tie everything up.

The nature of the 'roads' categories is given in the article Roads in Ireland, again largely written by zoney. The reason roads pages are called 'R747 road' etcetera is because names like R747, N8, N62 and so forth are a disambiguation nightmare. But certainly, the titles are a bit stilted and the whole categorisation/naming could be refined, tidied up and standardised - a big task which is beyond me!

Another point to note is that I think these roads would more correctly be described as 'routes'; something we'd need to establish before any major naming overhaul. Regards (Sarah777 09:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC))

Road Categories. On the roads, N62, N74 etc, they should be in the catgeory Roads in the Republic of Ireland, and not in the Roads in Ireland category. As you point out Roads in the Republic of Ireland is a subcategory of Roads in Ireland which is a supercategory that covers the entirety of the island. If you notice there are no other roads in the Roads in Ireland category, they are all in the Roads in the Republic of Ireland or Roads in Northern Ireland category. I shall move them back down, putting them in the supercategory confuses and renders the category systems pointless. Ben W Bell talk 15:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, you seem to have gotten a little confused over how categories work in Wikipedia. I see you noticed that the rest of the N roads were in the Roads in the Republic of Ireland category where they should be. Categories have subcategories to further subdivide the information, the "Roads in Ireland" category has "Roads in Northern Ireland" and "Roads in the Republic of Ireland" within it, this enables the roads to be further classified dependant on which country they are in. Having the Republic of Ireland roads in the supercategory rather than in the subcategory makes no sense. You posted to my page "Ben, I would appreciate it if you'd discuss your rather contentious editing of the categories of the 'Irish Roads' series of articles and reach some consensus before changing them. Regards", when all I was doing was reassigning 4 road articles to the same category as the REST of the N roads. You however I notice have just gone completely against the advice you were asking me about by moving them in their entirety out of that category, possibly due to your one declared refusal against the term "Republic of Ireland". You ask me to discuss what you call "contentious editing of the categories", and then you go one further and completely go against everything already established concerning both them categories, and the point of subcategories on Wikipedia. Incidentally your adding of the category "Roads in Ireland" to those articles using the "National Primary Route" template has completely confused the category structure even more rendering the whole thing a mockery, as the "National Primary Route" category is a subcategory of "Roads in the Republic of Ireland" which is a subcategory of "Roads in Ireland". I must ask that you put them all back. In addition do not remove miles from articles, it is commonplace and encouraged on Wikpedia to use both Miles and Kilometers in articles (with preference going to the local measurement of the country the article is about). Having them in there isn't "clutter", and by removing them you are confusing the article for other readers, and again I must ask that you put them back. Ben W Bell talk 21:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Sarah you appear to imply political motivation and POV upon me where non exists. I don't care if the largest state on the island of Ireland was called "The Land That Cannot Be Named", it makes no difference to me I have no interest in the topic, all I do is enforce the policies rules and styles of Wikipedia, policies and styles developed and agreed upon by the consensus of the community. There is currently no category at the moment for Secondary roads, perhaps yes one could be created, but in the meantime you have enforced your political POV upon these articles, not me, you have done what you accused me of doing, not me, and I ask once again that you correct the categories back to how they were. Ben W Bell talk 07:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Sarah777 please check my edits before you make any more accusations. You stated "You have chosen to arbitrarily add 'RoI' to many of these articles", all I did was move 4 road articles into the same category as the rest of them to be consistent with the rest of the articles on roads in Ireland. If I "arbitrarily" added RoI to any other of these articles it was simply to link the country to the correct article on Wikipedia instead of the island, not to push any kind of POV, and when I do so you notice that it reads as Ireland. You are the POV pusher here, not I, all I am doing is going with the consensus of the community and thinking of the final readers of the articles. These articles are not for us, they are for non-editing readers, don't lose sight of the point of Wikipedia. I ask you once again to put those articles back into their established categories and stop with your efforts to deny the existence of the term "Republic of Ireland" against the consensus of the community. Other than this one point you are a very good Wikipedia editor, and one we would be proud to keep in our ranks if you can get over this one sticking POV point of yours. Ben W Bell talk 10:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
'll take on board some points if you'd like to take on board the points I made to start this conversation, you seem to have ignored them and the work of others before them. Ben W Bell talk 20:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, tell you what. Lets move the ones in the Northern Ireland subcategory into a completely separate higher level Roads in Northern Ireland category, and leave the Roads in Ireland category as the state rather than subcategorised down a level into Roads in the Republic of Ireland. Then we can just tidy the roads that are in the same category multiple times but on different levels. Does this work as a good balance between us, with no one able to point a POV finger at anyone? Means having one less level of category and no category for the island of Ireland. Ben W Bell talk 10:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

If you're really willing to have that category "Roads in the Republic of Ireland" that they can be moved back into then yes I accept your proposal, it's practically what we had anyway just with an extra couple of subcategories. I'll see if I can start on it tomorrow sometime moving things back and re-cating. See we can work together, I know you're a good editor. Ben W Bell talk 21:32, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

State?

I am in total agreement with you that Ireland should be called by it's proper title, and country etc. The nuance, as pointed out to me on my talk page, is all of the island of Ireland is a country in it's own right, leaving arguments aside about the N/S split. I was wondering that if we try to "fix" it too much, then we might "break" it more. If we had agreed wording, that is probably the more livable way. Taramoon 23:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

keeping out of it - unless there is a vote.

Good try - I'll be impressed if you can really give it up for lent!. But you say (in NI) "except if there is a vote" so thought I should let you know that there is a sort of vote at talk:Republic of Ireland under "broad consensus" or similar. --Red King 20:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Coat of Arms of Ireland

I would like to know why User:Djegan insists in put back the old PNG file of the COA, since the SVG one is exactly the same, appart from the brownish color (which, in my opinion, is not the correct one). I think that it is almost vandalism, since he reverts the editions without reasonable arguments. If there is any problem in the SVG file, it can be corrected, instead of put back the PNG file. --Tonyjeff 14:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I haven't a clue to be honest. I don't know much about Coat of Arms; maybe something to do with the colour? (Sarah777 22:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC))

Flag of Northern Ireland debate

You have been involved in the flag debate on the Northern Ireland talk page. If you remember there were four option listed about the way forward. If you wish you can go here and make your position clear. regards--Vintagekits 21:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem :) lets just hope that it stays the way it is although I doubt it --Barry entretien 01:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Try to actually send me the link next time ; ). Cheers.--Play Brian Moore 19:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Boxing your politcal thingy

Hello couldnt help but notice your user page if you want to box it just place this on your user page {{User:Tal642/my userboxes/politicalcompass|0.25|-2.56}} Barry entretien 16:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Ahem the correct term is libertarian socialist you right-winger you --Barry entretien 21:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Update on Ghhrtvvd

Text and picture overlap

Hi again, I just wanted to let you know that using Firefox 2.0.0.2 on Windows XP, your picture, which I think is neat, runs over some of the text. Thanks! -- Whereizben - Chat with me 19:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ben. Yep I'm a FireFox too and yep it overlaps. This is something I'm thinking about. "Why?" - I ask. Does it overlap in that Microsoft browser...what's it called? I just don't know. I removed Windows Messenger and !puff! went the browser and also Outlook Express. Damned if I'm going to re-install Messenger just to get that rubbish back. (Sarah777 21:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC))

  • They do not overlap in IE7 which I am forced to have around to do development. And I know in the U.S. that you can't actually be rid of the Internet Explorer, so I suspect that you actually just don't have a shortcut to it anymore, but that it is still installed. As to why the difference, it is because of how browsers render the code... I can't say why for sure in this case it isn't working, but I will try to look at it more later to see if I can figure it out! If I do, want me to change it? -- Whereizben - Chat with me 22:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Follow up to your comments on my page

Confusion Apologies

Sarah, sorry about that, as you notice it's the only edit I've made to any of that lot since our conversation. I think maybe there has been some confusion added yes. The thing with categories is there are actually two schools of thought on Wikipedia with one generally prevailing but the other having a strong voice as well. The thing is to my mind that Regional Roads is already a subcategory of Roads in the Republic of Ireland which is in turn a subcategory of Roads in Ireland which means the article shouldn't really be added to the two upper categories as it's in the lower category (which means it is in the other two categories but just doesn't display on the screen until you go into the category). That school of thought is the predominant one but the other one that you can put then in all categories that apply does have some vocal adherents as well. I'll put those categories back in the article and I'll not alter then again okay, I promise. Someone else may come across them and do so, I cannot say, but I promise I won't add confusion to the mix and I'll put them back. Sorry. Oh and in case I haven't explained myself terribly well (it happens, I'm not a teacher) there is a Wiki article on these topics which I think everyone should read anyway Wikipedia:Categorization/Categories_and_subcategories which seems more about having the multiple levels in an article. Sorry, I'm not deliberately trying to annoy you or be patronising in anyway and I'll stop rambling now before I make more of a fool of myself than I usually do. Ben W Bell talk 08:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if we're only going to put it in one category if the category itself should be more descriptive, such as the examples in the Category sections of Wikipedia. Instead of Regional Roads, Regional Roads in the Republic of Ireland? Otherwise with only the one category it doesn't read well to a reader I suppose as you've no idea what regional roads, is it all countries regional roads, some regional roads or which? Does this make sense? Ben W Bell talk 15:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm happy to leave the three categories on there for clarity on the readers part, it's fine. I reverted my last change and I won't change it again. Yes I'll see if I can get the time and set up the Northern Ireland branch of the categories at some point in the near future. Ben W Bell talk 08:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Sarah, I'm finding your approach to discussion on Ireland-related talk pages uncivil, unconstructive and abusive. Please stop bad-mouthing your fellow editors and obscuring discussion. Please try to engage in some real discussion with a mind to compromise, consensus and resolving disputes, not winning them. This not only relates to the current matter of whether "country" should appear in the lead section, but across the board for your contributions, and has been a long-held opinion of mine and of others. --sony-youthtalk 23:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I take care to answer all of the questions you direct at me. If I answered you harshly of late then its because its nothing compared to how you have been speaking about me. Please stop. --sony-youthtalk 01:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

"Country" in the lead section - my perspective

Sarah, 'my perspective' is that the term is just too ambiguous to be used definitively with regard to Ireland and so should be left until the subject of the article has been defined. Only 1 in 3 editors agree with that - a sizable minority, but a minority. If it were only just that perspective and an opposite one then there would probably be a simple case for "let just move on."

But there are two other perspectives - one saying unequivocally that the country is the state and the other saying unequivocally that the country is the island. These polar opinions are divided almost evenly, 8-7. There is no consensus about this edit. How can you say that there is? Although the "ayes", as Red called them (you included, I guess), do look more adamant.

Let's accept that and work it out. It shouldn't be impossible. Just open up to the possibility. --sony-youthtalk 00:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Straw poll

Sarah, look at the RoI talk page - maybe something to make you smile. --sony-youthtalk 21:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:IMG RailwayStaKilcoole5297ww.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Tellyaddict 17:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:IMG RailwayStaKilcoole5304w.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. If you need help please contact me as copyright is taken very seriously on wikipedia. Please read this message and then hopefully you will get it right in the future! Happy editing! Tellyaddict 17:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

There perfect, you have corrected the tags correctly. Good work! Cheers - Tellyaddict 18:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Lakes of Ireland

Category:Lakes by country have a look, I moved Lakes of Ireland out of the United Kingdom list.--padraig3uk 00:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Excellent stuff Padraig - I wonder how much more of this type of thing is out there in Wiki? (Sarah777 07:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC))

Photography Barnstar

The Photographer's Barnstar
I award you (Sarah777) this Photography Barnstar for your regular and valuable image uploads, although you occasionaly forget copyright tags you quickly fixed them but we all make mistakes sometimes! Happy editing!!!! Tellyaddict 19:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Telly. I will endeavour to keep my tags in order in future!! Best Regards (Sarah777 20:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC))

La defense

Thank you for actually using your head against the mad Galway man. Cheers--Play Brian Moore 13:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Luggala

Thanks for improving the Luggala article! However, I've removed the link to the picture you uploaded; it's a duplication of the picture that's already there, it's so dark that it's very hard to make out any features, and the lake is Lough Tay not Lough Dan. Rwxrwxrwx 10:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I've put the old picture in the infobox; remember not everyone interested in mountains is into rock-climbing! Light and shade, storm and wind, snow and black black water....grey brooding skies - these are the things appeal to us soulful folk. (Sarah777 18:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC))

Request for Unblock

Any chance of yourself and others attempting to make Johny sensitive come to his senses. I've been unblocked before and it will happen again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.202.189.32 (talk) 00:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

I'm afraid you'll have to be a bit clearer - I don't do riddles! (Sarah777 02:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC))

Is that you?? How do I go about unblocking? (Sarah777 02:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC))

RE: The blocking of Fenian swine

Hi there! First, please allow me to extend an apology for removing your comment on the talk page. It wasn't my intention; it was simply a miscue when pasting my response onto User talk:Fenian Swine. I didn't block the user by some sort of selective authority. As I've mentioned several times, the username was a clear violation of Wikipedia policy. gaillimhConas tá tú? 03:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

The username is blatantly offensive, for reasons I've detailed on User talk:Fenian Swine. In addition, I am not imposing any biased point of view. Anyone can see that the name is offensive. gaillimhConas tá tú? 03:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Ironic or not, the username is entirely inappropriate; it invites conflict and division in addition to disparaging a group of people. To say I am uncompromising is a gross misrepresentation of my actions. For more than a week, I offered to help the user change his username and was met with nothing but hostility and insults. gaillimhConas tá tú? 03:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
OK. Your pov is very clear that Mr Swine is in breach. I'm going to seek some expert advice here. Be back tomorrow. (Sarah777 03:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC))
Why thank you, that was a scary 24 hours there.--Play Brian Moore 13:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

You surely are allowed and encouraged to vote in WP:RFCN. Of course, like most other processes on Wikipedia that look exactly like votes, it's "not a vote." So you should at minimum copy over some of your previous comment from WP:ANI, so that you're not presenting WP:JUSTAVOTE. There will probably be a drawn-out debate; do participate. — coelacan — 20:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote.--Play Brian Moore 20:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
If he wants to be stubborn, let him be. Also it isn't sock puppeting more that it was set up to fight my 'case'--Play Brian Moore 21:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Brittas, Dublin et al

Thanks for the info on the article's discussion page. Happy editing! --Stormbay 03:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Railway Station Route boxes

Hi Hammersfan. I see you reverted edits of mine to putting the "Station Box" for the articles Dublin Heuston railway station and Dublin Connolly railway station on top. Maybe we should chat before you continue, because I've just put the boxes on top on half the Railway Stations in Ireland and was about to start on the other half! My reasoning is that the 'boxes on top' style makes navigation from station to station much easier....with articles varying form a single line (in most cases) to hundreds of lines for the major city centre stations it becomes messy following a line. (Sarah777 13:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC))

The reason I've reverted them is because the standard layout for all stations is to have the route boxes at the bottom of the page rather than the top. This is the case for railway/metro/light rail networks from all countries. Sorry for not leaving an explanation when I reverted, but I'm having a frustrating time trying to get the line templates I've created right. Hammersfan 06/04/07, 14.55 BST

OK. Didn't realise there was a standard - obviously I should have checked before wasting all that Wikitime! Regards (Sarah777 13:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC))

No problemo. However, as you seem to have an interest in the Irish railway network (and I thought I was the only one!!), perhaps you could give a helping hand with adding detail to the templates I've started - {{Dublin-Belfast railway line}}, {{Dublin-Cork railway line}}, {{Limerick-Rosslare railway line}} and {{Dublin-Rosslare railway line}}, so that they can be as detailed as the ones for main lines in Great Britain (example {{South Eastern Main Line}}. I ask because I'm not Irish, am going purely by what is on Wikipedia and have only a vague idea of what I'm actually doing!!! Hammersfan 06/04/07, 15.05 BST
Will do Hammer. I have peppered some stations with photos already - I don't know a lot about the technical issues or engine types etcetera - my interest is mainly because trains and stations are very photogenic. However when you add railways to roads, rivers, villages and canals you start build an encyclopedic database of the countryside. Brilliant work you are doing on the stations I must say. (Sarah777 14:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC))

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Gaillimh

You may wish to look at and possibly certify this. --Auto(talk / contribs) 05:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


The Magnificent Seven

Vote: I support another set-up

  1. - IrishGuy talk 21:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. - padraig3uk 21:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. - (Sarah777 23:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)) (Failing this, Sony's Proposal is pretty creative, and sets things out fairly and in context).
  4. - Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver And The Vandal Watchman 23:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. - Deepsoulstarfish 00:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. - Vintagekits 00:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC) (I am not wild about changing the current situation and think that it would be a lot of hassle and arguements also - however if a decent compromise was suggested then I would be happy to look at that, failing that I am happy to go with the majority !vote.)
  7. --Barry O'Brien entretien 11:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

MOSNUM

Sarah, there is very little left to "interpretation" when the policy explicitly states the following:

Use digits and unit symbols for values in parentheses and for measurements in tables. For example, "a pipe 100 millimetres (4 in) in diameter and 16 kilometres (10 mi) long" or "a pipe 4 inches (100 mm) in diameter and 10 miles (16 km) long".

If, as you say, thousands of Ireland articles do not comply with this guideline, then yes, they all need to be changed. If you believe the policy violates the SI notation or is otherwise misleading, I would suggest you bring this to the attention of people who developed this particular WP:MOSNUM clause. I was not involved in writing that clause; I am merely enforcing what the policy says.

Also note that "10km" is not how the measurements are supposed to be formatted. There must be a space between the number and the unit, preferrably non-breaking. I corrected this, but please bear this in mind when you do edits in future. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:55, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Sarah, the template {{km to mi}} is tweakable. Feel free to read its documentation and choose how you want the output to look like. The default output conforms with MOSNUM, but otherwise the template is very flexible.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Cool tool! I'll add both units in future - thanks. (Sarah777 18:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC))

Apologies!

Hey, sorry if I caught you with the CSD tag on Church Mountain when you were writing the article. Generally, it's a good idea to write articles in a text editor or Sandbox before creating them and just copy them over, because I'm sure there are bots out there looking for empty pages to put tags on automatically. I'm not a bot, I just got a bit carried away before having read about 10 consecutive spam pages, so yeah, sorry! - Zeibura S. Kathau (Info | Talk) 11:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

hi

It appears I have been reported for reverting vandalism Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:Padraig3uk_reported_by_User:163.167.129.124_.28Result:.29 it reverts I made where made by a new anon editor account whoses only edits have been in this dispute, and the user that reported me was also involed with a similar dispute with me on another template.--padraig3uk 11:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Carlingford

Thanks for the compliment on the Carlingford article. Feel free to improve it if you wish. Cheers Colm Rice 12:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Regional Road

Hey there,

Just a quick note about Regional road. Great work there, fantastic to see so many articles. However, the arrangement of the links, and the section headings need serious rework. Wikipedia articles aren't supposed to be self-referential; i.e. there shouldn't be mention of "not in another category" or "Without an Article". At the moment part of "Regional road" are organised too similarly to a non-content "Portal", "Wikiproject" or talk page.

Also the other headings are subjective; they are potentially artificial divisions. Maybe you could categorise the roads (not articles) based on what county they begin in (according to the SI). Instead of urban roads category, you could have a category for roads entirely in a city council area (e.g. R509 entirely in Limerick City). The state of the article shouldn't be used as a categorisation, although it would be very useful to have such a categorisation on the talk page, in order to help organise the expansion of the articles.

Thought I would post this here rather than on the talk page of the article, as it is mostly your work. Hope you don't mind the comments, just trying to help out, as I would suggest the chances are very high with the current article of some stereotypical jumped-up Wiki-crusader editor not familiar with the subject matter throwing a fit and just trying to get it deleted or something.

zoney ♣ talk 21:22, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Zoney. The "no article yet" was because someone had put a list of roads with no article related on the page - I didn't want to delete them. The other categories were simply to make it easier for me to navigate - please feel free to change it. The 'scenic' class is subjective, of course, but does that mean we can't have one? Classes I'd like to retain are Short Roads (less than 25 km - because some of them are very short with no habitations en route and Urban Roads; some run entirely through built-up areas, certainly around Dublin. Please Wikify the page as you see fit - any help much appreciated! (Sarah777 21:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC))

"British Isles" - wondered how long it would take you to see this

Hey Sarah, sorry for the quick revert. The reasons I rv'd are three-fold. The one I gave is that the manual of style (MoS) says the first sentence should be a definition of the subject, not a discussion of the terminology. (I took a quick look but I can't find the exact place, so I can't link to it.) The second one is that that page is a tinder box. The mood is pretty good at the moment (generally has been for a while, some good craic had all round but its worthwhile to avoid slamming down too hard on anyone's sensibilities), but without fail the first thing a new contributor does to is edit the extent of use of the term in Ireland - either up or down. This has two effects, the wade in too roughly and start a flare up, the second is to make the new contributor a pariah figure for both sides - peace is far better for all is what the general mood is, and I subscribe to that.

To be honest, the term (history, extent of use, validity to Ireland, etc.) is the only thing that's discussed on the page. Take a browse through the Talk and archive, its hilarious the obscure tangental angles people are forced to make since the obvious approaches have failed for both sides in the past. The main issues at the moment are the extent of use of the term in Ireland and the origins of the term. If you want to take a (Irish) POV'd approach to editing - fairly open game to be honest on the page, everyone's POV is quiet open and the whole thing is taken more like a sport when the mood is good - try to find some good sources to show how little it is used in Ireland, numbers really are what we need, or nail the origins of the term (post-Roman Empire) to the 17th century. A word of warning though, sources are crucial, back everything up, blanket editing is a no-no.

The last reasons I rv'd is because you rv'd back to 2002. You don't want to do that. A lot of good ground has been won since then, one word at a time, and I wouldn't like to see other sections rv'd back to that date.

In all, I just didn't want you to get off on the wrong foot, 'cos I wouldn't mind you helping out on that page at all - in fact the more the merrier! There's no problem wearing you POV out on your sleeve, either, I do, as does everyone else, be they English, Irish or Scottish. But sensitivity is the key otherwise it all blows up again and we all land neck high in excrement (our own and everyone elses).

p.s. love the "The Magnificent Seven" above :)

--sony-youthtalk 09:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem Sony. To be honest, when I stumbled on the article the inner troll got the better of me. But I am trying to curb the little divil! (Sarah777 20:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC))

Sarah, just to make clear - I'm behind you on the British Isles page, but the tack you are using is a well worn one that has a never got anywhere. A cool head, backed up by references, is the only way to go. The "yes it is" "no it isn't" type of argument only damages the case as the "pro-British Isles camp" will win it hands down and losing it, after tempers have been raised, only makes the "anti-British Isles camp" look like a bunch of rabid, uninformed POV-pushers. --sony-youthpléigh 16:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sarah, just a word of (very) friendly advice - give up the naming fight on British Isles, you will get nowhere. Although I am English, I have a soft spot for all the fringes of our lovely islands; I often change "British Isles" to "Britain and Ireland" on other articles but in this case I am afraid I agree with the title ... but what is more to the point, so do most editors. There is no chance you will have your way and while it can be quite exciting to argue your corner for a while it gets tiring after a bit and irritating for your fellow editors. Please bear this in mind: we are all on the same side in trying to create an encyclpoedia even though you may not think it. When I have been involved in similar disputes in the past I have found it useful to take a break from the article in question and edit somewhere else ... you will be amazed that after a few days you even forget to look at what's happening back on your pet page because it doesn't actually matter. OK I have said enough ... I am trying to be helpful but good luck whatever you decide. Abtract 23:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Misuse of flag templates

Sarah, have you seen this yet Here .--padraig3uk 23:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

No. I was unaware of this "poll". Thanks. (Sarah777 00:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC))

I posted it on the Northern ireland talkpage as well as the wikiproject Ireland and N Ireland pages but not many people seem to have spotted them.--padraig3uk 00:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Regional road article

I've just discovered your highly informative and exhaustive article (and taken the liberty of making a couple of tiny tweaks).

Well done on producing such a useful resource for our readers! ...Gaimhreadhan(kiwiexile at DMOZ) • 02:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. It is very much 'work-in-progress' - in fact it could take years as there are about 900 Regional roads in the country! I cannot take credit for the article though as I am merely building on the original structure created by zoney ♣ talk, and as you can see (comments from Zoney above) my unofficial classification may need to be changed (though I've removed most of the text Zoney was concerned about). If all the Irish Wikipedians wrote a page on their local R-road we could do the job in maybe...two years! (Sarah777 08:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC))

Delgany

Very Big Hamster

Hi are you obsessed with the presence of rats in the irish countryside? when I saw your contribution first I thought is was a joke - "non-native species of rat"? - so I removed it but you keep restoring it. Why? I went so far as to engage in the "joke" with my reference to "pedigree siberian hamsters" - remember Fawlty Towers? - but obviously you are serious. Rat fixation perhaps.... Ned


Yes, Ned, deadly serious. Rats are no laughing matter, and Rattus norvegicus is naturalised in the Glen. It is important when listing the wild animals to include them all - after all, Wiki is an encyclopedia not a tourist guide. The Siberian hamster is obviously a different matter - being fictional it is not of concern but his cousin the Siberian Tiger (photographed bravely by my very self) is of great concern, and may well have been responsible for the disappearance of the tree-huggers from the forest some years back. I certainly like to think so. However Ned, if you really feel we should keep news of these unpleasant mammals under wraps please delete the info on old norvegicus - I will not reinstate it! (Sarah777 10:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC))

Re: North Killiney

I did read the article talk page. Here is the note that I left for User:padraig3uk concerning deletion of the nonsense tag:


The appropriate way to handle this for deletion is through either a prod or an AFD. Please do not add back the nonsense tag. In my opinion, since this may be a hoax, an AFD would be a good way to capture comments related to a hoax. — ERcheck (talk) 15:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I note that padraig3uk did take my suggestion and tag it as a hoax, but did not take it to AFD. — ERcheck (talk) 15:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
The article will not be deleted unless someone nominates it for deletion. See Wikipedia:Deletion policy for information. — ERcheck (talk) 23:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
But somebody already did. And you deleted the deletion rag!! Kafkaesque or what?!(Sarah777 23:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC))
It was nominated for speedy deletion — but does not meet the criteria. Thus, for deletion, it needs to be nominated with either PROD or AFD. See the deletion policy link above. — ERcheck (talk) 23:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Please stop

The information added by this edit needs to be removed, please stop adding it back. One Night In Hackney303 00:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

When you remove a block of comments like that (including one of mine), an explanation of some sort would be in order, don't you think? And I added it back ONCE; "keep" implies more than once. (Sarah777 00:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC))

Actually "Please stop" is perfectly civil, "Stop now" would not be. Once, twice, feel free to apologise whenever you're ready. One Night In Hackney303 00:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The 'first' occurred by accident as I was replying to it when I got an edit conflict (obviously with your deletion of it); the second time I deliberately added it back to enquire why you deleted it without any explanation. Feel free to apologise whenever you're ready.(Sarah777 01:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC))

Proxy Bomb

I have just raised your eidts to this article on WP:ANI. 19:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by One Night In Hackney (talk • contribs)

And who would you be? (Sarah777 19:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC))
Well, I suspected as much. Now there is an editor who doesn't add comments to his edits! (Sarah777 19:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC))

Edit summaries

Sarah please use edit summaries properly please. thanks!--Vintagekits 19:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I reverted changes that were made that had no edit summaries! And the comments above yours (Vintagekits) are unsigned; could whoever refrain from leaving unsigned comments of my talkpage? (Sarah777 19:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC))
Sarah, I am not talking about the Proxy Bomb article or any article in particular, I am talking in general. Also I did sign my comment. regards--Vintagekits 19:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I have always found Sarah to be a meticulous editor, go easy on her occasional lapses ... we all have them. :) Abtract 22:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Abstract; but I was wrong on the Proxy Bomb categorisation and my head is currently hanging shamefully! (Sarah777 23:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC))

Ringsend People

Why did you remove People from Ringsend section. How exactly is it inappropriate ? Djln

The reason I removed them is that I thought they were not notable. I never heard of them and whoever added them gave no indication as to why they are notable. Regards (Sarah777 22:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC))

Bear in mind that if there is a wp article on them they have been deemed to be notable already :) Abtract 22:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh S***e!! Never noticed that...two bad hair days in succession....I will undo the damage.(Sarah777 23:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC))

Image:IMGHollyfort_4610w.jpg listed for deletion

File:IMGHollyfort 4610w.jpg
Orphaned Image of Downtown Hollyford

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IMGHollyfort_4610w.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BigrTex 22:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

It is "orphaned and obsolete" according to the citation. That sounds like a good reason to put it down! Kill it!(Sarah777 00:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC))

I notice I've called Hollyford "Hollyfort" - another reason to zap it. (Sarah777 00:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC))

Mind you, it's actually better than the version in the article; really shows - you just can't get good help these days. (Sarah777 00:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC))

R710 road

Hi there, I don't understand why you have removed the precision from the length of the R710 road in the 'R710 road' article. If a road section is 6.8km, why can't 6.8km be used instead of 7km? I understand that there is probably some kind of wikipedia policy at play here that I don't know about, but surely less granular information (when the information is available at a given accuracy) is a disimprovement? Could you please explain to me your rationale for reverting my changes? Merlante 12:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


Distance precision: The reason I changed the km to the nearest round figure is that I have applied a template to all Irish roads articles to standardise the layout. Most articles contained only rounded km; people from UK/US constantly added miles using automatic converters. Thus a road was described as 25 km in the original article turned into "the road is 16.62 miles (25 km) long". Which, given the original figure was (as is common practice on NRA publications) a rounded km figure and the miles given completely meaningless "precision". Also, to say "the road is 8 km (5 mi) long" is much less cluttered than writing "the road is 8.5 km (5.31 mi)" - which gives no additional useful information; even assuming the original figure is correct; which it is unlikely to be. The 8.5km above is itself almost certainly rounded. Should we go to the nearest meter, and say the road is 8.495 km long? "surely less granular information (when the information is available at a given accuracy) is a disimprovement?" It could actually be an improvement; road plans are usually available to one tenth of a meter; thus in the example above using the granularity argument we could write that 8.4953 km (5.27873 mi) is better. Not for anyone who has to read it! (Sarah777 23:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC))

Rochfortbridge (2)

Well folks, I followed this saga from the start to January 14th 2006 and stopped from exhaustion! Denis, with all due respect, you seem to have difficulty conforming to some necessary Wiki standards.


“The following text posted by Denis O'Neill, Gaulstown. (Poet and playwrite of national acclaim). all information below is accurate and can be verified.”

Remarks like that should never be placed in the body of an article; add to the comment when making a change or put in the Talk Page.

“The town is also home to Christo Bradley”

Only NOTABLE people can be mentioned; those who have a Wiki article about them or who have many hits on Google, for example. At the very least you should explain why someone is notable if his notability is contested.

“The following text taken from the book "Earl of Belvedere" by Denis O'Neill, Gaulstown. (Poet and Playwright of national acclaim). all information below is accurate and can be verified by the author.”

Again, this has no place in the body of the article. If you have written such a book it should be referenced; publisher, ISBN number etcetera. The interesting history which you posted extensively was deleted because it lacked any references. “can be verified by the author” is not a reference. You must cite published sources, preferably at the point in the text where the facts are given.

“The oldest recorded family name still living in the parish is that of the O'Neills, formerly High Kings of all Ireland (for a world record breaking dynasty of over 900 years), the O'Neills in the parish can be traced back to Eoghan Ruadh O'Neill, who gave assistance to sir Richard Tyrrell during the battle of Tyrrellspass in 1597. of course the family name itself traces back to Millesius, son of an Egyptian Pharaoh who proclaimed his dominion over the land he called "the Isle of destiny" about 7000BC “

Again this was unreferenced and reads to me very like invention; all the more reason your edits are being reverted when you supply no acceptable references. A further concern:

Denisoneill (Talk | contribs) at 14:07, January 10, 2007 – you removed wikify and cleanup tags

Revision as of 01:16, January 12, 2007 – you removed very justified wikify tag

Revision as of 01:29, January 14, 2007 - you removed equally appropriate cleanup tag


By this stage I can only conclude that the banning was justified unless you give an undertaking to stop adding unreferenced “history” and removing tags. Regards (Sarah777 11:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC))

Archiving

I set you up an automagic archive. Each archive will be 100kb long, and then it will go to the next archive. The first archive page is User talk:Sarah777/Archive 1, and can grow untill it is a little longer than this page right now. Messages more than 1 month hold are being archived. Does that work? Hipocrite - «Talk» 12:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Stratford

Answered here. ww2censor 14:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Stratford, also known as Stratford-on-Slaney, is a small village on the River Slaney in West Wicklow in Ireland. - 14:25, May 19, 2007 Ww2censor

Indeed Ww! That is what I always knew it as - and I was going to call the article by that name till I noticed the sign; checking around I couldn't find much support for Stratford-on-Slaney online; so rather than have someone revert it I settled for Stratford. But I can personally attest that 20 years ago it was universally known as Stratford-on-Slaney in SW Wicklow. (Sarah777 13:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC))
Remember that online is not the only source for such info. Try using a Gazetteer, if you can find one. I have the Gazetteer of Ireland published by the Government Publications office that I presume is still in Molesworth Street. My copy is the 1989 issue and also gives the Irish names, though maybe they have a new one since then. According to this web page a new edition should have been out in 2003. If they do have it, let me know. Also look here. FYI I used to live in West Wicklow! ww2censor 13:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip. And the link to An Post seems fairly definitive, doesn't it? My own location down on the farm was only a half dozen miles west of there! While the name was often shortened to "Stratford" in conversation (just as Newtownmountkennedy is spoken of mainly as 'Newtown' locally) - the full name was always understood to be Stratford-on-Slaney. You fancy changing the name? I think we have sufficient evidence. Regards (Sarah777 14:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC))
Go ahead and move the page to the full name and chnage the tinro around to read: Stratford-on-Slaney', also known as Stratford but also make a new redirect page called Stratford on Slaney. Cheers ww2censor 14:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
The deed is done.(Sarah777 15:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC))

British Isles

Sarah, you really need to calm down. You're discussing content with British editors while persistently making offensive and irrelevant remarks (stating that the British are worse than the Nazis, and calling them the Brutish and so on) furthermore you're using the word "troll" when they rise to you bait. Edits like these [3], [4], [5] are uncivilised and have no place on Wikipedia. I, and probably others, have a lot of sympathy for your point of view but this really isn't an acceptable way to communicate it.--Lo2u (T • C) 20:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Lo2u; Firstly, I am calmness personified. It's the pushers of the imperial nomenclature who are getting upset - I have not once complained about their abusive language. Secondly, please read what I said; I said not that "the British are worse than the Nazis" but that Britain aka The British Empire is worse than the Third Reich. Simple statement of fact. That doesn't necessarily make the average Englishman today any worse than the average German circa 1939, does it? So Lo2u, if you want to help, please point out that their attempts to include Ireland in "The British Isles" is offensive. Thank you. (Sarah777 21:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC))

It may be offensive but if the term exists and is in common use there is inevitably going to be an article on it and the only thing that would change that would be if it were to drop out of use. If there's documented evidence that the term causes offence (and there is) the article should say that, so I've no doubt it was a mistake to take out the references to controversy - and I'm sure they'll be put back in. Nevertheless, it would be very easy for you to explain your objections to the contents of the article without repeatedly and explicitly comparing Britain unfavourably with the Nazis. Please try to understand that whether it is your intention or not, people will find that very provocative. --Lo2u (T • C) 22:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Lo, how can I explain this inoffensively? I detest and object to the word "British" because the British Empire was an Empire worse than Nazi Germany. That is why I find trying to include Ireland in something called the "British Isles" so offensive. Whether you agree or not, whether you like it or not, whether it provokes some people or not, that is my position. If folk want to try and argue that the British Empire was not worse than the Third Reich; then that is something I will forcefully contest. What you ask is that I forsake FACT for the sake of politeness. No can do. I could completely ignore the issue of "Britishness" on Wiki, and would, if some editors were not trying to impose that name on my country which sacrificed a lot for freedom from "the British Empire" and the right to be NOT British - in any sense. (Sarah777 23:04, 18 May 2007 (UTC))

I understand what you're saying, and I think I understood it before. You won't agree with me but I also think there are more diplomatic ways of saying the things you would want to say. "The term British Isles is offensive because the Britain is worse than the Nazis" isn't an argument that will win you any friends because you limit your support to those who agree with the second part - nobody else on the talk page as far as I can tell. More importantly, I've looked through the whole of that talk page (but haven't found time for the archives) and all I've really learnt is that you hate the terms "British" and "British Isles". What I'm wondering is what you're actually trying to do. Do you want a deletion of the page with redirect to either "Britain and Ireland" or "United Kingdom", a total deletion, a much shortened article saying the term's offensive (like this one) or some sort of drastic redefinition? And I really would be interested to know. --Lo2u (T • C) 23:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Lo, a deletion of the page with redirect to "Britain and Ireland" (the common usage in Ireland), would be non-POV and inoffensive. Then it wouldn't be necessary for me to offend millions by having to repeatedly explain WHY the term "British Isles" is offensive. Regards (Sarah777 09:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC))
Lol, Squeaktroll? Please see Wikipedia:Avoid the word "vandal" and also assumeing good faith. To call me a vandal isnt exactly an argument and my removal of POV cannot be classified as vandalism. Please, SqueakBox 01:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
You may believe that the British Empire was more evil than Hitler's Nazism (though there are those who would argue this is justifying Nazism I dont believe justifying Nazism is your intention) but this is an extreme minority political belief and to insert that into the geographical encyclopedic article on the British Isles is not helpful in terms of creating a neutral encyclopedia. And to call me a vandal over such a content issue is just silly, SqueakBox!~
Dear Vandal, I appreciate the trollery in your suggestion that being honest about the British Empire justifies Nazism! But what I am doing is explaining WHY attempts to apply the term "British" to Ireland is offensive. this is a difficult task why one is addressing minds conditioned since infancy to imagine the Empire was some sort of benign accident. (Sarah777 08:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC))
Dear Vandal! To whom do you refer? Did you read the WP article I sent re this word? FYI I was brought up to consider the BE benign but then, being a young rebel absolutely rejected that opinion. Now I am not so sure but think this dispute should be carried out in places other than the opening of British Isles. I've put British Empire on my watchlist, SqueakBox 17:59, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

People have explained repeatedly why the term "Britain and Ireland" isn't appropriate so I'm not going to bother. However, you don't seem to be engaging in any sort of meaningful content dispute, instead you're warring on the talk pages. "Britain is worse than the Nazis" (or Stalin, the Khmer Rouge, Satan or whatever) is just an analogy, not a reason why Britain is bad. Even if it were true (and repeatedly inserting the work "fact" everywhere doesn't make it so) the Nazis have nothing to do with why you hate the British Empire and there's no need to mention them any more than there's reason to mention any of those other things. If you want to make a difference rather than score points on the talk page, the way to do that is to show that "Britain and Ireland" is an alternative to the current title. If you've decided that can't be done, I don't know why you're bothering to continue the discussion.--Lo2u (T • C) 12:55, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I am continuing the discussion because to refer to Ireland as part of the "British" Isles is offensive. I use the Nazi analogy to show how offensive; the very fact that you question the validity of the analogy is illustrative of the problem. "People have explained repeatedly why the term "Britain and Ireland" isn't appropriate"!!!! Nope, they have NOT!! They have convinced each other. Preaching to the converted. "Britain is worse than the Nazis" is just an analogy, not a reason why Britain is bad. Nope, an analogy isn't a REASON. But the British Empire was as evil as the Third Reich and spanned centuries (right up to Iraq today) - that is WHY the term is offensive. So, if you want to improve the article; give it a name that isn't grossly offensive to many of those living in Britain and Ireland. (Sarah777 13:26, 19 May 2007 (UTC))

Sarah, as an outside observer, I find that your comments about Nazis, "British" cultural identity, etc., are unhelpful to any meaningful discussion regarding the article. Please keep your opinions about the behavior of the British Empire to the proper Wikipedia pages or to yourself. The article has already been clearly marked with the controversy about the naming of the islands, the majority of the world calls it the British Isles (Wikipedia is not central to one English speaking country), and the term "British Isles" is not offensive per se as the name is historical. Illuminatedwax 02:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Sarah, I wasn't saying that your discussion or use of the term "Nazis" was offensive, I was saying that it was irrelevant to the article as I saw it as an outside observer. I was responding to a complaint left in Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts, and I was merely trying to tell you to stay on-topic in the talk page of British Isles (in addition to adding my opinion on the matter). I don't think my comment was uncivil or incoherent; sorry if there was a misunderstanding. Addendum: when I said "keep your opinions on the proper Wikipedia page or to yourself" I was merely restating that Wikipedia is not a soapbox, but that your opinions are very much welcome in the proper places. Sorry if that read as rude. Illuminatedwax 00:01, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:IMG_R747eastwards5077w.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IMG_R747eastwards5077w.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


Another orphan....

File:IMG R747eastwards5077w.jpg

...DELETE(Sarah777 00:25, 27 May 2007 (UTC))

Jane Davis, Daniel Barrett et al

The following, sourced from [[6]] with/without additional internet sourced confirmation, are no longer extant on the relevant Wikipage while dead Welsh Guards continue to be listed. [7] [8] [9]. At that time the victims of the Birmingham pub bombings were listed [10]; I personally could not list one set of victims without listing the other. Aatomic1 11:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

AVFC This user supports Aston Villa

Cram school

From the article: "Cram schools (also known as crammers) are specialized schools that train their students to meet particular goals, most commonly to pass the entrance examinations of high schools or universities." Sounds to me like it fits the bill.

Lapsed Pacifist 16:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I would consider it more of an informal term than slang. While they wouldn't use it themselves, I don't regard it as pejorative, and I can't think of a better description.

Lapsed Pacifist 10:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Grognardistic

I have to ask, what does grognardistic mean?

Dear User:1-555-confide, I have often wondered that myself! Haven't a clue; but you can call yerself one after you've done 2,000 edits...and you can give yourself a cute little medal! (Sarah777 22:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC))

Proposal: Variants of the abolished NI Flag in Template:Country data Northern Ireland

Hi, you might want to voice your opinion in a proposal I made in Template talk:Country data Northern Ireland#Request for edit. As the discussion has been going on and the page is quite cluttered, here my proposal in short:

Inclusion of variants in the Template:Country data Northern Ireland as follows:
| flag alias-cgf = Image:Flag of Northern Ireland.svg still used by the CGF (Commonwealth Games Federation)
| flag alias-patrick = Image:Saint Patrick's flag for Northern Ireland.svg
| flag alias-map = Image:Alliance Northern Ireland flag.svg , which I find aesthetically more satisfying than
| flag alias-union = Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg as the only official flag of NI

The defenders of the abolished flag argue that this flag is still used in context with the Commonwealth Games. I think that the inclusions of variants is the first practical step in discontinuing the use of the abolished flag in articles about biographies and international organisations (like the european parties). AFAIK, a map tag is already in use in articles about NI geography; this map symbol was never intended to be used as an icon, and I think the usage of Image:Alliance ni flag.png looks better.

I would welcome your input to this debate greatly.

Kind regards, Dingo 05:08, 30 May 2007 (UTC) (currently anonymous)

Thanks!

Hi Sarah777, thanks for the words of support. Not intimidated by Bastun at all, but I did made a decision in the past not to be involved in a situation where personal attacks are involved. Although I have never been involved with Bastun but once, over some minor edit on Croke Park, there was a tendency there with him to take a hostile posture too. Also, I have witnessed some of his personal attacks with other editors. Otherwise I am not completely off the BI page.Gold♣heart 14:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Gold - yes, that seems to be his style; he's at it again on the BI talkpage in relation to a proposed solution I had to the impossibility of getting agreement from the British editors on the issue. The The British Isles and Ireland. (Sarah777 15:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC))

Yup, it's a term that is often used. My criticism of the BI page is that the other names, which are very often used, like The British Isles and Ireland, or Britain and Ireland are not even allowed a mention in the article. Also, much of the history, especially from medieval period onwards is pretty much af ork, so too is most of the geography section. There should be a para, near the top, dedicated to the alternate names. For some of those editors to be shouting pov is startling, and makes wonder is there light in the area at all. Gold♣heart 15:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
It's very difficult to get through the British editors, for they outnumber the Irish editors by about 16/1, and that's one big failings of WP. Sony has a good record on the page, although I do not agree with him on everything. I am sure that if Ireland was bigger than Britain, then it would be a different story. Gold♣heart 00:04, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Sony WAS ok! But I'll find it hard to forgive that totally OTT attack. He was calling for me to be stoned! Even the British Editors (with one exception) didn't lose it like that. Regards (Sarah777 00:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC))
Ye, I agree with you there, it was a bit strong. I was surprised and I tried to dampen it. Maybe I did more harm than good. Bastun did set the tone of the page, and that's why I usually don't like hanging around editors with a tendency to be abusive. Otherwise I really do need a rest from this page, it gets very "mobish". Gold♣heart 00:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
I have not been abusive. On one occasion, I accused Sarah of trolling. Please withdraw that remark. BastunBaStun not BaTsun 00:46, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Not clear (again) which of us you are addressing. (Sarah777 00:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC))
Goldheart. BastunBaStun not BaTsun 00:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
(reduce indent) I am sorry if my remark has upset you Bastun, but sometimes you do attack the editor, and not the content. There is no doubt that you will have a certain strength in numbers on the British Isles page, and it's a pretty safe place for you to be. I find most of the British editors very polite in their exchanges with other editors. I do notice that you have rowed with other editors in the recent past, I do suggest that your input to WP should be greater than it is, and best to keep to the issues. Gold♣heart 01:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Sarah, I am really sorry that you were blocked. There are a lot of hostile people on Wikipedia who live in hope of some sort of showdown with some editor or other. The whole affair has been very sordid for Wikipedia, from the personal attacks even until today. It must be realised that one is often dealing with very spiteful people on WP, and then the mob rule will swing into action. Remember, success is the greatest revenge. Happy editing in the future, and forget about the tiny people, because they are tiny. Gold♣heart 08:20, 30 May 2007
Thanks Gold - I fight my corner and move on; I never hold a grudge unless it's fun to do so!. There is only ONE editor on my list as a result of all this. Though I'm a bit annoyed with Ben also for closing the AfD so precipitously and driving me into 3RRsville; but Ben is basically a good guy. And thank you Gold for your support in my time of trial!(Sarah777 19:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC))
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sarah777/Archive_1&oldid=1142487448"