Jump to content

User talk:TheOldJacobite

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 70.152.204.190 (talk) at 18:09, 9 July 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Archive box collapsible

Lost Cities

I'm not sure why you removed these. They had Wiki links which seemed adequate as references, did you look at them?Doug Weller (talk) 07:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Philip K. Dick and Category:Christian writers

You are invited to a discussion here. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 04:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arts and Crafts Movement

If you have an interest in this page, you probably need to watch it better. Some well-meaning person has stuffed in a number of nice pictures from Australia... so many that it amounts to an overkill. Problem is that this has totally stuffed the formatting. This is particularly the case for someone with a wide screen format (as I have). (on a wide screen you can juggle your image to see how it's gooing to look when it's narrower, but I don't know of a way to do this on a narrow screen)... Anyway, on my screen their is a gap in the text that stretches for six inches. There's no point in asking the person who did it to fix it... you are the one that juggles images! Amandajm (talk) 12:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Harlem Renaissance

Not sure why you edited out "primarily gay" as a descriptor for the contributors to Fire!!. Wallace Thurman, Langston Hughes, Countee Cullen, and Bruce Nugent are all acknowledged to have engaged in affairs with other men. Have added a reference to the assertion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dblstrength (talk • contribs) 19:37, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kindred spirit

I was taken aback too, but check out where the link leads! Skomorokh 15:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

explanation required

Please explain why you want to confuse our readers. Cos if you want to not explain the jibberish you revert to I suggest you find another hobby. Thanks, SqueakBox 00:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evangelism

I can't help but notice your userpage identifies you as a Guinness drinker. In the spirit of brining light to the savages, I introduce you to our new article on Murphy's Irish Stout! Skomorokh 13:24, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I will admit to writing in a somewhat more lyrical style than is typically called for, all of it is scrupulously taken from the references. Skomorokh 13:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have a Corkonian acquaintance of powerful rhetorical skill, who, whilst evaluating the virtues of my editing Wikipedia, noted with scorn that the project didn't even have an article on his beverage of choice, and thus, the article.Skomorokh 13:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minima Moralia

Minima Moralia (Adorno book) does seem to be the primary usage, so I would recommend a redirect there. We could always move the current dab page to Minima Moralia (disambiguation) and add a notice to the top of the German book article. Hut 8.5 20:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IP vandal

You're welcome. I really hate fake edit summaries. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

previous warned vandaled again...

Since you caught it last time I thought you'ld like to know a followup - see history of Bahá'í Faith and User talk:204.82.175.208--Smkolins (talk) 13:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately all I know how to do is revert vandals; I don't have a clue who or what ViA is. There were also some other people reverting their work too.--Smkolins (talk) 22:20, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This IP

This IP is a schools one so some students may have done so.We are sorry about this incident. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.190.141.189 (talk) 10:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ulster Defence Regiment

With regards to your editing. There is a major discussion going on at the moment on the talk page for the article. I feel it's rather unhelpful for you to delete the entire section which does actually contain a verified link for the IRA story and does point out that the UDR site is a self published source. It would be very helpful if you were to come into the discussion and express your views on the subject matter and see if we can come to some agreement on what you find acceptable or unacceptable when including unpublished memoirs. I'd rather that than have an edit war again over the article.GDD1000 (talk) 00:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add: I've checked the WP:V and it states that: Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources in articles about themselves, so long as: the material used is relevant to their notability; it is not contentious; it is not unduly self-serving; it does not involve claims about third parties; it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; there is no reasonable doubt as to who authored it; the article is not based primarily on such sources. GDD1000 (talk) 00:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Clash article has been rated as GA-Class

Hi! I've seen you around on Clash articles... Would you consider becoming a member of WikiProject The Clash, a WikiProject which aims to expand and improve coverage of The Clash on Wikipedia? Please feel free to join us.

–pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Know Your Rights"... Listen to this / Run ... to join us!
Todo:

Highest priority

Fair use

  • Add fair use rationale to all images and sound samples (all except images already labeled free use).
  • Resize large "fair use" images to less than 300 pixels, @ 72dpi.

Articles

  • Try to expand all songs stubs if possible. Some song stubs can not be expanded and should be redirects to the album. See WP:NSONG.
  • Expand album articles (all).
  • Remove Trivia sections (trivia sections should be avoided in favor of presenting information within the framework of the article's main text).

Needing attention

Project building

  • Add WikiProject The Clash banner {{WPClash}} to all appropriate talk pages of all Clash-related articles.
  • Add/update assessments for all project pages.
  • Personally invite quality editors working on The Clash articles to join the project.

If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log.

Harry K. McClintock

Please stop removing references to the man's railroad career. He is well-known as a railroad boomer and writer of stories of the rails. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.151.35.6 (talk) 19:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The X-Files peer review

As you're a top contributor to the X-Files article, I'd like to inform you that the article is currently undergoing a peer review. This is an effort to get the article up to featured article standards for an eventual FA nomination, in the hopes that it can be featured on Wikipedia's main page on or around the release date for the new X-Files movie entitled The X-Files: I Want to Believe. If you can, please take a look and offer input on improving the article. Thank you. Equazcion •✗/C • 18:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative society article

I reverted the article again to my last rewrite and added some extra info. Please leave it as is; i'll input more references and such but everything is correct and I put in more than a wekk writing it; please do not destroy my work as everything is correct and verifiable.

I'll work together with you to perfect it to your wishes, yet do not destroy my work completely. Thanks. KVDP (talk) 07:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your Feedback - WP:BITE

Thankyou for your comment and pointing out to a new user the error of his ways. You have misunderstood the point. Let me explain it. The individual in question did not take the sensible course you took - ie explain the mistake made. They instantly cried vandalism. --Reality check12 (talk) 08:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Capitulation of Irvine

I'm not an expert, despite having been born in Irvine! The description sounds a bit odd to me, and doesn't agree with any other references I can find - not even with the Wars of Scottish Independence article, to which it links. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 13:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop committing vandalism against my changes re: Libertarianism

If you have particular issues with an edit I am making, do not revert the whole thing. If you want to discuss on the talk page, I am listening but all you are doing is reverting everything I'm writing. q (talk) 22:04, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam

Hey, I see you're the last person to edit this article so I have a question for you. I have a copy of this book, but the version I own doesn't seem to be listed in the article. I'm not that familiar with the book (Image:Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam.jpg), but this is what the inside cover looks like: (Image:Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam inside cover.jpg & Image:Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam copy number 44.jpg). Also, here's a sample of the poems: Image:Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam poems and pictures.jpg. Feel free to use any of these for the article and I'm not sure what else is needed for the image rationale because I've never uploaded a book cover until now. Cheers. APK yada yada 07:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Zorn

Thanks for your encouragement on the John Zorn article and related materials. I'm currently updating it following a peer review so if you have any contribution to further this aricle to GA status they would be gratefully appreciated. JZ is the only officially recognised genius I have ever had the pleasure of meeting so I'm glad to contribute to furthering awareness of his work. DISEman (talk) 03:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

X (U.S. band)

Most of the edits that were reversed were not productive, nor did they contribute to the artilce. The reversion was proper. Your warning was not. Look at the items that were tagged. Do you really think that each line of text needs to be cited. Really? 199.200.243.253 (talk) 15:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do it yourself

I'm not sure why you reverted the changes I made to Do it yourself, but please stop and take the time to look at the links that I've changed before reverting again. Some do not belong, and your earlier culling removed a few that did (for example links to DIY culture amd DIY ethic in the "see also" section). If you feel strongly about the changes, please discuss it on the talk page. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 04:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One small question

I don't mean to employ your talk page as a forum for technical questions, but since you left the welcome on my user page... Anyhow, whenever I add a person to a category, they always get listed on the category page in alphabetical order of their first name, rather than their last. Is there any way I can solve this? Thanks, Lithoderm (talk) 16:03, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retirement

The statement was in regards to the SPA nominator Red Hugh, who is a sockpuppet of a 'retired' user that I just don't care to name. The AFD was closed, and the SPA has slung no less than three personal attacks without consequence. SashaNein (talk) 21:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

KENNETH REXROTH

I think you sent me a warning by mistake. I'm the fellow who added the "On The Road" comment (Reinhold Cacoethes) in the "Beat Generation" section of the "Kenneth Rexroth" article. For a while there, I was a bit confused, and thought you to be one of those crack-pots and half-wits that watch over a Wiki-entry as their own personal fiefdom and who add and subtract factual information when it does not jibe with their own fawning tendencies and/or distorted world-views. I now believe you were trying to contact another editor. Since you are on "holiday"...I will forthwith accept your apology and just consider the matter dropped. Garagehero (talk) 01:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why I restored the "Las Vegas" comment

I think it raises a very relevant point, namely what defines vaudeville? Vaudeville-like entertainment has never vanished entirely, and I think there's a case to be made that live entertainment in general, and shows featuring a series of short, separate performances in particularly, are experiencing a bit of a revival. Are Las Vegas shows in fact vaudeville without the name, or, if not, why not? Dpbsmith (talk) 15:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signs

Hi, why did you say that Signs was not about an alien invasion and delete it from List of apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic fiction? Are there any statements by Shyamalan or others involved with the movie's making to suggest something other than this straightforward interpretation, which is assumed by the Signs wikipedia article? If not I think it should probably stay, there are plenty of reviews which refer to them as aliens and which would qualify as reliable sources. Hypnosifl (talk) 17:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"I will defer to your opinion on the matter. My main point is that, unlike "War Of The Worlds" or "Independence Day," "Signs" does not show an alien invasion. At most, there are mysterious indications, and then---perhaps---one alien. It simply does not seem the same. But, do what you like. Cheers!"
Thanks. On the point about numbers, I'd just note that although we only saw a few of the creatures in the movie, the characters did see television reports that they were appearing all over the world and attacking humans, and towards the end of the movie it was reported that "the battle turned around in the Middle East" when "three small cities there found a primitive method to defeat them" (i.e. found the creatures were allergic to water--getting the quotes from here). So, this does sound like the world was facing a full-scale invasion. Hypnosifl (talk) 19:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Do not vandalise the Old English (Ireland) page. If you can support the remarks that I have questioned: do so; otherwise do not even attempt to revert my request for citations. 86.42.91.234 (talk) 10:56, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LewRockwell.com

What makes you think that Rockwell would object to the label "anarchist" with regards to LRC? Rockwell's Rothbardian anarchocapitalism is well-documented (See Talk:Lew_Rockwell#Removing_Anarchist_Classification). DickClarkMises (talk) 19:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't think WP:NPOV allows us to say which is the "true" anarchism. I personally know lots of anarchocapitalist types who also refer to themselves as anarchists, but of course the black-flag-waving anarchists would disagree because of the difference on property rights. Since both classes of ideologues use the term fairly often in reference to themselves I would say that the category should include both sorts of anarchist simply as a matter of common usage. Going deeper and coming up with the "answer" for Wikipedia purposes would be a WP:OR/WP:SYN problem too, I think. Again, I really just want to avoid stepping in the bear trap of trying to tell some people they are incorrect in using a term while endorsing the term's use for others. DickClarkMises (talk) 01:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

William Blake rephrase

Regarding the section of influences and adaptation of his work, i've rephrased it now but can we have some citations to back up the claims. I've seen it all too often that these mini-lists degenerate in to unverifiable, random claims or just plain lies. Citation makes their inclusion more relevant and provides links to articles which may be of interest to the reader. Thanks. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 18:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help me?

I wonder if you can help me with a problem I have. I've been following the edits of the ISP editor User:64.41.7.95, and I have reverted the majority of them because they generally do not improve the articles. They're not vandalism, per se, but they substitute stilted or convoluted language for more straight-forward and understandable constructions. At times, they actually change the meaning of things, such as changing "presenting", the medical term in the article about Lyme Disease, into "present." In an film article, the words of a direct quote were changed. You reverted this editor's work in the Mexican Revolution article, so I think you can get a sense from that about what I mean.

As I say, if the edits aren't in good faith, they're a particularly insidious form of vandalism, because they would likely pass muster a significant percentage of the time, since they're close enough to being acceptable that they don't draw attention to themselves.

My question is -- where do I go with this problem? I'd appreciate any advice you'd care to pass on. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 04:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply - I'll get some evidence together and ponder how to present it at ANI so I'm not laughed off the page. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 04:55, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In casy you're interested, I posted at ANI Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 06:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ivan Illich

Good day. I've been patiently awaiting a response to a question I've left on the Ivan Illich talk page. I don't know of any source in which he self-identifies as an anarchist, which I need before I can add him to the list of anarchists currently being built. As you've just responded to an attempt to remove notation of him being an anarchist catholic, perhaps you would know of a citation I may use. Any assistance would be appreciated. --Cast (talk) 04:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks & a Tip O' the Hat

Thanks for the note about the Int'l Agrarian Bureau. I should add at sometime that in 1947 the IAB was reorganized as the International Peasant Union. I have an interest in those political and economic paths that lay outside the mainstream: Agrarianism, Distributism, Social Catholicism and so forth. I see from your entry we share several other interests: Scottish heritage (Clan MacRae), the Celtic nations, science fiction, coffee and Guinness. Cheers! LAWinans (talk) 15:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merci

I wanted to thank you for you constant watching of the article Quebec sovereignty movement. You have more patience than I do... :-) I always intended to come back to it and do a good job at sourcing it, same for History of the Quebec independence movement, but as you surely know these are complex and controversial topics requiring a careful choice of words, a lot of research, a lot of reading... Before doing anything though, I thought it made sense to start a bibliography on the subject, which I did here:

The subject of Quebec's independence is of course inseparable from the broader topic of Quebec nationalism and I also started hunting references for it, which I listed here:

There is a lot of online material (integral or excerpts), most in French, but still enough in English to write something decent using mostly English-language references. We'll get there! :-) -- Mathieugp (talk) 15:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there probably is a lot that you could do to help out. Two heads are better than one in many situations. Not to mention it would keep me motivated and focused on this task. :-) Can you read French pretty good? If not, I'll try to think of things that could be done with English-only sources. -- Mathieugp (talk) 16:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: 74.230.99.202

I've blocked the IP for 48 hours. I find that revert, block, ignore is the best defense in cases like this. GlassCobra 23:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RBI will not work in this case because I am not an attention seeking vandal. This is a matter of principle. The Whiskey In The Jar article will be maintained in an appropriate manner and I will not allow RepublicanJacobite to continue vandalizing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.146.80.126 (talk • contribs) (23:25, 8 July 2008)

Republican-Jackoff-Dike

You will not win this battle over Whiskey In The Jar. I will not relent.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TheOldJacobite&oldid=224620014"