User talk:Cckkab

Hello Cckkab, welcome to Wikipedia.

You might find these links helpful: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies.

1981 Irish hunger strike

Please revert your edit. The sources specifically identify it as a Pyrrhic victory, which is capitalised. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I changed Cckkab 00:10, 06 Oct 2007 (UTC) The hunger strike was a Pyrrhic victory (a book source given where this claim is made) to Some sources see the hunger strike as a pyrrhic victory (followed by source) The earlier affirmation is categorical, un-Wikipedia like and for me is blatant political motivation

Portobello College

Hi, please put messages at the bottom of talk pages, or they may be missed. The page lacked any verifiable sources. Since what is there was probably true, if it were longer I might have just tagged it unsourced, but a two-sentence "article" could probably be deleted as lacking in content anyway. Jimfbleak (talk) 18:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External Links

Hi Cckkab, Please note that chat or discussion forums are normally to be avoided. So I removed the link to boards.ie. Good work on the rest of your edits though!AleXd (talk) 21:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello also from me, cckkab. This is on the new link at the TCD article to Satellite Photo of Trinity Hall. It isn't a great picture that's linked, with a big scribble on it. Any chance of a better picture? Strawless (talk) 15:08, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maighread Ní Dhomhnaill

Maighread has since changed the spelling of her name from 'Maighréad' to 'Maighread'. Please discuss moves in talk pages before moving them.--Theosony (talk) 11:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Ezra Nawi. Thank you. RolandR (talk) 12:01, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ezra Nawi. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You have now added an unsouurced and defamatory claim to this article three times today. This is a breach of Wikipedia policy on biographies of living persons, as well as potentially a breach of the three-revert rule. Please do not repeat this unacceptable edit. RolandR (talk) 12:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vicipéid (Ranna, íomhánna, stíl, srl)

Hi. Am placing a comment because of the apparent redirect from your GA user talk page. Some of your recent edits/additions on the GA project have required (and still require) some redress. A few examples:

Categories: Categories are largely hierarchical, so it's somewhat redundant to place articles in every "tier" of category. For example, if "Islands of Galway" is a child of "Islands of Connacht" which in turn is a child of "Islands of Ireland", which is in turn a child of "Islands by country", then we DON'T need to put an individual article in each category tier. The lowest/best-fit category is enough. (EG: On the EN project you will note that "Lettermullen" is a child of Category:Islands of County Galway. It isn't also added to Category:Islands of Ireland or other parent categories).
Images: Images uploaded with a fair use claim need to be actually used in an article. "Fair use" images which aren't actually used anywhere are in breach of project guidelines and are eligible for deletion under DB-F5 or DB-F7. (You uploaded dozens of screen-captures and tagged with "fair use in [article]" without either specifying the article, or using them anywhere. These will all be deleted unless this is corrected).
Links: Article links should ideally be included within the body text of an article. For example, if the word "short-story" appears in the main text of the article, add a link to it. Best not to create a "see also" section down the bottom and add a link to "short-story" there. (Also, best if such sections are labelled as "see also" and not "external links". External links is the title typically used for lists of thirdparty URLs. Not for Wikipedia articles.)
Relevance: Links and categories should ideally be linked/categorised based on relevance and association. For example, it isn't really appropriate to put a "see also" style link on a subject where the linked article is only very loosely related to the main subject. (For example, putting a "see also" section in "short-story" and adding a link for "literature of Ireland" isn't really a close fit. The subjects are not closely enough aligned.) Same goes for categories as "cross linking" of categories doesn't really work. (EG: Putting "singers by style" in a "songs" category isn't really appropriate. The "songs" category should probably contain articles about songs. A singers category should contain articles about singers. Putting singers in a songs category doesn't work)

Happy to help if you have any questions or comments. (You can leave any questions on either my EN or GA talkpage.) Guliolopez (talk) 15:51, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all that adivce ... which I will try to integrate. On the images, those are projects I or friends will be working on very shortly (though could take some time). We thought it better to upload in one go as much faster, and then refer to them (and also cant upload from every pc we are on). I have copies and references anyway stored, so no big deal whatever if you want to delete. Let me know if you prefer communication as Gaeilge. And here or on your own page. More later ! cckkab (talk) 19:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Samhaltáin, íomhánna

Go raibh maith agat, Guliolopez, as ucht do chuid cabhair is comhairle a thug tú dom.

Thug mé faoi deara go raibh nasc ann ar Canúintí Ceoil chuig an clár ar youtube. Ach thóg tú amach an nasc. Is dócha gur botún ba é… ?! Ceist : Tá an samhaltán ar an leathnach TG4 formáidithe mar comhad png. Is cosuil go bfhuil svg níos fear. SVG, sin an moladh oifigúil… mar shampla http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_use_policy Cén fáth SVG agus níl PNG… ? Mar is comhad XML text é. Ach dúirt tú “(Don't use images in place of text.)” Níl a fhios agam ca bfhuair tú an riail sin. OK.. caithfidh téacs ann mar ALT mura bfhuil tú in ann an svg a thaispeáint… ach svg… sin téacs ar aon nós.

Ni thuigim cén fáth a dúirt tú “And inappropriate use of Fair Use images..”… Céard a bhí míchuí ? Cén íomha? Agus an é sin an “Fair Use” nó catagóir eile atá I gceist? (cf e.g. http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images ) Is fearr linn leathanaigh atá beo bríomhar, ceapaim. Maidir leis an Gaeilge, is soiléir go bfhuil gá le inneachar níos saibhre. Mar sin, (1) tá na naisc seachtrach (chuig youtube srl) an-tabhactach; (2) samhaltáin in áit téacs, mar shampla , 40px sin níos desise / tarraingteach. Is fiú é má tá an t-am ag an eagarthóir é a dhéanamh go maith … is gan botún (níl muid in ann chuile rud a dhéanamh 100% i gceart an chéad uair - ach tiocfaidh muid ar ais níos deanai má tá fhios again go bfhuil fadhb ann).

GRMA as ucht do chuid cabhair is comhairle Úsáideoir:Cckkab 15:24, 8 Eanáir 2012 (UTC)

Feach ar an leathnach seo, mar shampla agus inis dom ceard a cheapann tu (samhaltán a chur i gceart fos!) Cckkab 00:17, 9 Eanáir 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]