User talk:MurphiaMan

Irish place name

I made two other templates:

These should do what you want, but be aware that the "rule" right now is to use the English-language place names, even in Gaeltacht areas. A change to this would requite a change to the WP:IMOS. See a recent discussion on the Dingle talk page. --sony-youth^pléigh 07:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spiddal was reverted because the WP:IMOS is always to use the English-version of a placename if one exists. I only saw {derive} after I made those templates. Now I don't know what to do about them. What do you think? Keep or use {derive}? --sony-youth^pléigh 08:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cast Away

I am not sure how this "Talk" thing works, so bear with me. First, why do you ask that I not add any more references to the "Cast Away" movie's discussion section? I've only added two, and one was perhaps two sentences long. Second, are you the one who keeps deleting my additions to the "Cast Away" movie's main page article titled "Time on the Island"? If so, for what reason do you continue to delete my corrections to that section? And, if so, can you not see that there are significantly more than 1500 days between December 24, 1995 and any date in April of 2000? Beyond this, if you are the one responsible for preventing my edits, you apparently don't even allow someone to make punctuation corrections, such as adding a comma in "December 24 1995". If you are the one responsible for this prevention, what is your reasoning for doing so?

Douglas J. Bender [Elkhart, IN] (November 19, 2007) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglas J. Bender (talk • contribs) 15:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just read your letter to me. Sorry for creating a bit of a storm, there. However, why is it that one should not reference, in the main articles, discussions on parallel topics which are in the main article discussion section? If I were to post in the main section the exquisite detail which I posted in the discussion section, I would think others would find it too detailed for "primary" consumption. But unless I include a reference to the discussion section, others would not realize there is more detail there about Noland's time on the island. Have I uncovered a dilemma of mythic, or cinematic, proportions?

Douglas —Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglas J. Bender (talk • contribs) 18:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for your help. I was wondering, though, if you think it would be acceptable for me to post the entirety of my post from the "Talk" area regarding the "Time on the Island", given that it is rather detailed, and relatively lengthy. The reason I ask is because, if I understood you correctly, in the not-so-distant future that post of mine in the "Talk" area will be "archived", and thus not immediately visible to those who might happen to peruse the "Talk" articles. Basically, I don't want it to be "put in storage", where it will be forgotten. Any suggestions?

Douglas J. Bender (talk) 19:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC)Douglas J. Bender[reply]

MurphiaMan: "Why not formulate a neat piece of prose to say what you want to say in simple terms?"

In regards to my "Time on the Island" contribution in the discussion area of "Cast Away", I don't do so because that contribution cannot be forumated as a neat piece of prose using simple terms. It's detailed calculations, combined with exquisite assumptions and correlations. It's a nasty, but I think correct, description. It is what it is, I'm afraid. But I believe it is quite accurate. Oh well. Douglas J. Bender (talk) 22:10, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Douglas J. Bender (Elkhart, IN)[reply]

Your deletion in Ruth Kelly

Hi MurphiaMan,
why did you remove[1] nationality=[[United Kingdom|British]] from Ruth Kelly ? -- Túrelio (talk) 13:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indenting

I changed the indenting of my comment as that's how I want my comment to appear. It's a personal preference, not a point of contention. Rightfully or wrongfully it's an approach taken all over Wikipedia. -- Jza84 · (talk) 13:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks, I like it as it is. I certainly have more pressing things to tackle on Wikipedia at the moment than a dispute over identing; I for one am not intending to be added to this list. Best of luck for the future, -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:42, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inniscrone/Enniscrone

Hi. As someone who has edited the Inniscrone and/or Enniscrone page recently, you may be interested in this. Regards, --The.Q^(t)(c) 15:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to pass comment at Talk:Football in the Republic of Ireland#Requested move

Hello, I am leaving a friendly notice to invite you to participate at a requested move from 'Football in the Republic of Ireland' to 'Association football in the Republic of Ireland', due to your participation in a previous requested move. Hope to see you there! EJF (talk) 21:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

de:Helen Dillon

Her garden at 45, Sandford Road Rannelaghin Dublin will close for ever this September. Last chance to take pictures. Please assist. --Eingangskontrolle (talk) 16:35, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]