Jump to content

User talk:AlwynJPie

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

Welcome AlwynJPie!

Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are 48,447,301 users!
Hello, AlwynJPie. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions! I'm Jax 0677, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
Some pages of helpful information to get you started:
  Introduction to Wikipedia
  The five pillars of Wikipedia
  Editing tutorial
  How to edit a page
  Simplified Manual of Style
  The basics of Wikicode
  How to develop an article
  How to create an article
  Help pages
  What Wikipedia is not
Some common sense Do's and Don'ts:
  Do be bold
  Do assume good faith
  Do be civil
  Do keep cool!
  Do maintain a neutral point of view
  Don't spam
  Don't infringe copyright
  Don't edit where you have a conflict of interest
  Don't vandalize
  Don't get blocked
If you need further help, you can:
  Ask a question
or even:
  Ask an experienced editor to "adopt" you

Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page, and someone will try to help.

There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
  Fight vandalism
  Be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome
  Help contribute to articles
           
  Perform maintenance tasks
  Become a member of a project that interests you
  Help design new templates

Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.

The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own private sandbox for use any time. Perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.

Sincerely, Jax 0677 (talk) 22:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)   (Leave me a message)[reply]

February 2013

[edit]

Hello, I'm Tbhotch. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Catherine Howard, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 10:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Isabel de Clare, 4th Countess of Pembroke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Margaret of Scotland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of women who died in childbirth, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Zdenka and Princess Maria Pia of Bourbon-Two Sicilies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ferdinand III of Castile, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zamora (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

[edit]
Teahouse logo
Hello! AlwynJPie, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us!
I, and the rest of the hosts, would be more than happy to answer any questions you have! SarahStierch (talk) 06:56, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of women who died in childbirth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Caecilia Metella (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013

[edit]

Information icon Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage newer editors. Please read Wikipedia:NOTVAND for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. Yobol (talk) 17:06, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Circumcision. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Zad68 02:47, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United Kingdom driving test, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Counterpart (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm TheRedPenOfDoom. I noticed that you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you.

With this edit [1], you removed properly sourced content and replaced it with unsourced content, and/or non reliable sources. It is the responsibility of the person adding or restoring content to provide appropriate citations to reliable sources-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:28, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A pie for Pie

[edit]
Yes you might need some after the discussion :) Murry1975 (talk) 22:04, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Murry1975 for the pie! AlwynJPie (talk) 01:50, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of Ireland revision

[edit]

I redid my edits with explanations. Don't take that as hostile reverting. Feel free to revert them all, or the specific edits you disagree with. Regards, Rob984 (talk) 15:34, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Republic of Ireland

[edit]

Alwyn, I've close that discussion on Talk:Republic of Ireland. Wikipedia talk pages are intended to discuss specific changes to articles. However, the discussion had already gone deep down a rabbit hole of general discussion. I hope you understand why I took the action I did, --Tóraí (talk) 22:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that the discussion entitled Southern Ireland pertaining to the name of the Republic of Ireland should have been closed at this stage. There were still many issues needing to be resolved. AlwynJPie (talk) 22:24, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History in the lead of Ireland

[edit]

The stuff you stuck in was undue - the paragraph about history is already the largest in the lead and the bit you stuck in isn't even described in the body of the article. The appropriate place for that is in the section "Revolution and steps to independence" and I have no objections to it going there, it would still not be important enough to go into the lead though. Dmcq (talk) 12:25, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The stuff I stuck in the lead was to help the subsequent paragraphs make sense to those unaware of the origins of the state. AlwynJPie (talk) 01:33, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Middlesex

[edit]

We have to deal with the world as it is not as it was fifty years ago. It's misleading to readers to suggest that Middlesex still exists as a county in any meaningful sense. Sorry, that's just the way it is. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank goodness that more reliable sites disagree with such Frenzied assertions. Howard Alexander (talk) 13:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You go and live in the fantasy world of Wikishire, I will continue to live in the real world of 2015. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:50, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nine of of ten letters to my home have Middlesex in the address. AlwynJPie (talk) 04:01, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indenting

[edit]

Howdy. Recommend you read up on WP:INDENT, concerning posts on talkpages :) GoodDay (talk) 02:40, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks GoodDay AlwynJPie (talk) 04:02, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Ireland

[edit]

Please don't start pushing your "Southern Ireland" views again, as you did here and here. You know that you have aired these views repeatedly on several talk pages and/or in edit summaries and that there has been a solid consensus against them every time. Continuing to flog a dead horse is disruptive. Scolaire (talk) 08:05, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Scolaire for your responces. All the edits I have done are to clarify the facts. Everything I have put has been factual. For example the lead in the article "Names of the Irish State" implied that the Free State only included the 26 counties when, in fact, the Free State originally included Northern Ireland as well as the current state. I improve articles by clarifying the facts and correcting errors. I am not trying to push anything or to "flog a dead horse" as you put it. The term Southern Ireland was the name given to what is now the sovereign state when the island was partitioned in 1921. I have no political axe to grind. Southern Ireland is not an obscene or offensive term, it is an important part of our history, and I can see no good reason to eliminate or surpress its use. AlwynJPie (talk) 19:14, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say you had a political axe to grind, but you clearly have an axe to grind, and it's not healthy for the project. What you are adding is not factual; it is your version of reality, which is at odds with everybody else's version of reality. Southern Ireland is not an important part of our history. It is a very insignificant part of our history. It was an idea that never got off the ground, and I would be astonished if any writer ever has devoted more than a few paragraphs to it. You are indeed flogging a dead horse by continuing to insist on its importance, and when you "clarify the facts", knowing your edits are against consensus, you are being disruptive. Scolaire (talk) 21:45, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you once again Scolaire for your comments. Everything I have said is factual. As I have said before the use of the term Southern Ireland as a place name for the 26 counties is very common. The Wikipedia article Southern Ireland is misleading in that nobody would seriously use the term Southern Ireland to mean the province of Munster, the South-East Region or South-west Region of Ireland, or the European Parliament constituency of South Ireland or, at least, not to the extent that it requires a mention in this disambiguation article. AlwynJPie (talk) 05:26, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Munster, the South-East Region and the South-west Region of Ireland are in the "See also" section. Your edit put them in the "may refer to" section, which as you say is not correct. The South constituency is there because "South Ireland" is included in the introductory line. If you disagree with its inclusion you could raise it on the talk page, but bear in mind that a disambiguation page is meant for everything that might be searched for; the "extent" to which it might be searched for is not a criterion. But as for the primary topic, I had it as the southern part of Ireland, Dubs boy had it as the Republic of Ireland and you had it as the 1921 polity. Where there is no consensus on a primary topic the obvious thing is to leave it as "may refer to" and have all the meanings in the list. Scolaire (talk) 08:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you still don't understand. It doesn't matter how many times you write your own personal history of "Southern Ireland", or whether you quote large chunks of other Wikipedia articles to try and make it appear as though they back up your argument, it doesn't make it the true history of the country. Try sending it to a history journal, and see if they'll listen to you. It is not ever going to be accepted here, because you cannot back it up by reference to existing journal articles or books. To repeat myself once more, this one-man crusade is disrupting the project. You need to let it go. Scolaire (talk) 07:41, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Scolaire. I value your comments and your entries and edits. As I am sure you are aware, the Free State and the Republic has claimed sovereignty over the whole island; Southern Ireland is the only term I know that has been used solely to mean the area covered by the 26 counties. But I understand some that object to the Partition will never use the terms Northern Ireland or Southern Ireland because by doing so would give the partition some sort of legitimacy. AlwynJPie (talk) 00:32, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That is not a response to what I said. I am not going to engage with you any further if your only answer is a phony "thank you" and a replay of the stuck record. Scolaire (talk) 08:01, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I, like many others, use the term Southern Ireland purely as an apolitical geographical term for the 26 counties. The terms Free State or the Republic are not appropriate as they have and, in some respects, still claim all 32 counties. Southern Ireland has always been just the 26 counties. AlwynJPie (talk) 19:37, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 22 September

[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 2 October

[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Teenage pregnancy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coal Miner's Daughter. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Refs

[edit]

These are needed. Thanks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Provisional Government of Ireland Page Move

[edit]

Either you failed to notice the discussion at Talk:Provisional Government of Ireland (1922)#Requested move 8 April 2015 or you deliberately ignored it when you performed this page move without any prior notice or discussion. Given your long history of disruptive editing and filibustering on talk pages, it is very hard to assume good faith. Scolaire (talk) 08:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The provisional government was set up by the United Kingdom government to govern Southern Ireland in place of the home rule Southern Ireland government set up under the terms of the Government of Ireland Act 1920 which failed to function. Home rule in Northern Ireland continued under the Government of Ireland Act 1920. AlwynJPie (talk) 14:19, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, you knew exactly what you were doing. You did it knowing that there was a thorough discussion and a clear consensus against you. Next time you try a stunt like that, I'm bringing it to ANI. --Scolaire (talk) 14:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was unaware of the discussion. The fact remains that the provisional government was set up on 27 May 1922 by the United Kingdom government to govern only Southern Ireland NOT all Ireland as the Provisional Government of Ireland implies. The Free State was not established until 6 December 1922. http://www.historicaldocuments.org.uk/documents/doc00005-001.html#TextContainer AlwynJPie (talk) 16:13, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You have accused me disruptive editing and filibustering. That is wrong! I am proud to say that all my edits are factual apart from some clerical errors, which I have acknowledged and rectified, where possible, when they have come to my attention. I appreciate that you have sort consensus on many of the edits you have made and that you have backed up your reasons for the edits you have made with citations but I am still very concerned with many of your edits particularly in relation to the history of the Irish Free State which you say never included Northern Ireland. AlwynJPie (talk) 19:15, 18 October 2015 (UTC
I'm pretty sure Scolaire would be over the moon if NI was part of the Free State even if for a minute as it would have meant all of Ireland being removed from the UK during that time, however other than on this site, I never see any mentioning of this "fact" anytime partition is discussed. Mabuska (talk) 21:56, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Lest antbody get the wrong impression (though I know Mabuska didn't mean to give the wrong impression), I would be over the moon if at any time the country were reunited by consent, with a full guarantee of civil rights for all. Scolaire (talk) 07:40, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If by "factual" you mean "correct", that is not so. Far from making only "clerical" errors (whatever they're supposed to be), you have several times made errors of fact, which have been pointed out to you on every occasion. I haven't just "backed up my reasons for the edits I have made with citations", I have gone out and done the research to make sure that what I am adding is correct. Apart from doing a Google search to find instances of people using the phrase "Southern Ireland", or the text of an act of parliament, the only research you ever seem to have done is reading other Wikipedia articles. You even more or less admitted here that you have learned whatever you know about the subject from Wikipedia. In fact, you said it here in so many words: "I use Wikipedia to find out facts." This is all just more filibustering. I'm going to ignore filibustering from now on, but if there any more disruptive edits I will take it to ANI. Scolaire (talk) 08:02, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Scolaire I appreciate your input but please tell me what errors of facts you think I have made. Yes, I do use Wikipedia to find out facts. And through my cost I've learned that Wikipedia cannot be fully relied upon. Which I guess is understandable owing to the fact that anyone can edit it. Nevertheless Wikipedia is a good starting point when doing research on any subject but its sources should always be checked and other sites should be used to verify what has been said. What has fact finding got to do with filibustering? The first time I heard the term "Southern Ireland" being used was by a man born in Ireland to mean the part of Ireland administered by the Republic of Ireland, i.e. the 26 counties. I thought it was just a nickname. It was from Wikipedia that I first learned that Southern Ireland was the official name given to that area when Ireland was partitioned. Obviously, I have since looked at other sources to confirm that. I like the term Southern Ireland because I see it as a purely geographic, generic term for the 26 counties; whereas Ireland, the Irish Free State and the Republic of Ireland can sometimes mean the whole island. AlwynJPie (talk) 20:02, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See what you did there? That is a filibuster. You ask questions and you have no intention of listening to the answers. The only purpose of this is to wear everyone down with words. Well, I'm unwatching this page, and I'm going to delete any posts you make to my page, so goodbye. Scolaire (talk) 20:40, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Scolaire I would not ask a question if I did not want to read the answers. I have read all your comments on my talk pages. AlwynJPie (talk) 01:16, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Two examples then: This is factually incorrect. There has never been more than one name for the abortive entity that was "Southern Ireland". That was pointed out to you here on the talk page, but you simply responded with the same mantra that you're repeating here; in other words you didn't hear what people were saying. And this is factually incorrect. The 1922 state did not comprise the former Southern Ireland, although it happened to be coterminous with it. Your edit summary was also incorrect: there is nothing vague about "26 of the 32 counties", nor is it any less concise than "Southern Ireland", as was pointed out to you here. I am not going to back through your contribution history to find more examples, and, since I confidently expect you just to trot out the same mantra again in reply, I am not going to continue this pointless discussion. Scolaire (talk) 08:25, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Scolaire. What part is factually incorrect? The current government of Ireland administers the larger of the two territories that that were created when Ireland was partitioned in 1921 under the Government of Ireland Act 1920; this territory was given the name Southern Ireland. You and I may know which "26 of the 32 counties" we are referring in the lead of this article but will a new student? AlwynJPie (talk) 19:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Prehistoric Ireland

[edit]

Clarified with "human inhabitants to have left traces of their existence probably arrived from Scotland" ? Not in the article cited and definitely not clarifying anything with this addition of unsourced probablity. Please remember we are editing an encyclopedia, thanks. Murry1975 (talk) 11:48, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Murry1975. I saw that in the AA Explorer Ireland handbook. Probably not considered a reliable source. I thought it sounded better. It more or less says the same thing but also speculates that the earliest human inhabitants to have left traces of their existence arrived from Scotland. I am not sure why Scotland. Because the closest land mass to Ireland is Scotland? If the ice had cleared in England and Wales first they would have become habitable first. So, there is a good chance the earliest people came from Wales or Cornwall rather than Scotland, even though there would have been more sea to cross. AlwynJPie (talk) 20:28, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"but also speculates that", is the issue AJP. Spain is high up the list, for which there is some DNA research aswell. Murry1975 (talk) 13:53, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Murrey1975. Yes it now seems the humans that arrived in Ireland from 8000 to 7000 BC came from the south following the melting ice cap rather than from across the continent as once believed. Later invaders, the ones that came with Red Deer, appear to have crossed the sea from Scotland. AlwynJPie (talk) 11:53, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

Are needed. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:35, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

Remember that when adding medical content please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a build in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:29, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ref provided did not support all the content in question. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Doc. I agree with you. I have noticed some factual differences in the articles on chemical pregnancies that I read. For example some say that a chemical pregnancy is a miscarriage that happens before implantation and others shortly after implantation. AlwynJPie (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copied

[edit]

Also the content was copied from here [2] :-( Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:40, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Doc. I didn't copy the text exactly word-for-word. I read a few articles from various sourses on the subject and found this one to be the clearest written so I decided to use that text as a template. I was trying to improve on it but it was so well written there was not much I could do to make it better. You may have noticed that I had previously used another sourse as a template and changed it quite a bit; I feel the current text was set up much better. AlwynJPie (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anti-Irish sentiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Missing link. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

[edit]

Copyright problem icon Your addition to Anti-Irish sentiment has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. You are also violating the policy against edit warring. Both of these violations can be sanctioned by a block. So stop it. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 18:05, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I will try to edit it first and then add it. AlwynJPie (talk) 18:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You will have to do a very good job because obviously several editors will be examining it very closely for any copyrights problems.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 18:20, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Will you be willing to do it? I find it hard to re-word without changing the meaning. AlwynJPie (talk) 18:26, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If you had not begun reverting I eventually would have, because I think it is relevant material. But I dont have time to do it today, or in the next couple of days.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 18:36, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And again on the Partition of Ireland. Do not do this. It really is becoming a competence issue. Murry1975 (talk) 20:36, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

You were advised here that copying text from web pages is a violation of copyright, and liable to get you blocked, yet you have done it again here. Why are you so keen to get blocked? Or are you just trying to see how much you can get away with? Scolaire (talk) 22:40, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is not easy to re-word without changing the meaning. I want to add something on the origins of the concept of the partition before 1914. I have read these articles: http://www.historyireland.com/revolutionary-period-1912-23/the-search-for-statutory-ulster/ and https://www.ucd.ie/ibis/filestore/wp2006/67/67_kr.pdf and would like to add text without violating. AlwynJPie (talk) 23:15, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

[edit]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Yoko Ono into Kyoko Ono Cox. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 01:29, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kyoko Ono Cox for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kyoko Ono Cox is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyoko Ono Cox until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 02:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

[edit]
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without verifying permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted.

Please take this opportunity to be sure you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  — Diannaa (talk) 21:08, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

AlwynJPie (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Sorry. I was unaware that copying and pasting snippits of text was copyright violation. I wont do it again. AlwynJPie (talk) 06:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is clearly not the case. You received multiple warnings and acknowledged them. Please explain exactly how you plan to ensure you will never violate copyright again, and how your understanding is different than the last time you discussed this, on February 1st, or the last time you were warned, on February 21st. You are very welcome to request another unblock, but you have to convince us that you won't be making any more copyright violations again. Yamla (talk) 11:36, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

AlwynJPie (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I do not edit to cause disruption and I am not a troll. All my edits have been in good faith and were to improve the encyclopeadia. I believe I have contributed to Wikipedia in a positive way. I have corrected many errors and inaccuracies and added useful information. If I disagreed with something, I always tried to explain my reasons. I have debated on the talk pages but I have not been rude or argumentative or sarcastic with any of the other editors no matter what they said to me. I did not think I was doing anything wrong by the copying and pasting of extracts relating to the article I was editing. I did not know the copyright rules applied to the talk pages. I believe I have learned a lot more about the rules of violations of copyright since. It is not necessary to block me because I will no longer be copying and pasting from other internet sites. AlwynJPie (talk) 23:47, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were clearly warned back in February about copyright violations. It took me less than a minute to find the source you'd copied from in this this contribution (which, as an admin, I'm able to view). Wikipedia doesn't need editors who can't be bothered to take copyright law seriously. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:49, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, AlwynJPie. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]