User talk:Yorkshirian/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

RCC lead

Thanks for the support on the RCC lead. Including this in the lead is wrong - not so much for the current wording, but that this is the thin end of the wedge that will see others want to build on that. There is a strong double-standars issue here. Xandar (talk) 11:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Hi, I see you have changed infoboxes for Beverley & Market Weighton to infobox settlement. But can you please explain how this change fits in with our WP:UKCITIES standard which states "All settlements of the United Kingdom (that are not coterminous with a local government district) are to use the Template:Infobox UK place, though some very rare exceptions exist. For those that are coterminous with a local government district (which are usually large cities / unitary districts or equivalent—such as Liverpool, Leicester, and Bristol), please use Template:Infobox settlement."

As for as I can determine we should be using the UK Infobox for these places not the settlement box.

Keith D (talk) 14:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The coat of arms added to the infobox for Beverley is not current and so should not be in the article as far as I can see. Keith D (talk)

Edit war and the three revert rule

May I make you aware that the three revert rule prohibits users restoring material more than 3 times in a rolling 24 hour period. You appear to be engaged in an edit war at Beverley and are not contributing to discussion but enforcing preferences upon articles that others object to. --Jza84 |  Talk  18:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I had a right to remove this as you do not have a consensus. Four editors have commented they do not want that infobox, whilst you have continued to revert to it. I will be reporting you for breach of 3RR (despite a warning), which may see you loose your editting privlidges. I'm also displeased with your edit summmaries and comments on talk pages which appear to be disparaging. --Jza84 |  Talk  11:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I've reported you for 3RR. However, at this stage I must also express my concern about your comments at Talk:Market Weighton and your edits to Manchester which are incivil and distruptive respectively. This does nothing but harm Wikipedia and harm your reputation. --Jza84 |  Talk  12:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

PS please re-read WP:UKCITIES (not WP:CITIES as you keep referring to). Manchester has the distinction of being a local government district, whereas Selby etc do not. UKCITIES states that local government district ONLY should use Template:Infobox settlement. However, don't take this up with me, please resume debate at Talk:Beverley to achieve a way forwards. --Jza84 |  Talk  12:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I think at this stage you're likely to incur a much greater block on your account as well as bring more attention to your editting style. Remember, do not distrupt Wikipedia to make a point. Your edits to Manchester are not in good faith and starkly so (you are gaming false claims of consensus). Have you not considered what maturity and respectabiliy level appears? I do not believe you are being conductive to the good of the project and I suspect you would agree. Why not rethink your approach? --Jza84 |  Talk  12:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I was going to ask you to quote the guidance from UKCITIES that you are referring too, but I think this is a rather pointless waste of time frankly. You've done nothing to help your preferences or reputation. There's no point continuing this discussion between us. I imagine the editting community will be displeased with your recent contributions. I think I've given all the advise I can. --Jza84 |  Talk  12:31, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

All settlements of the United Kingdom (that are not coterminous with a local government district) are to use the Template:Infobox UK place, though some very rare exceptions exist. For those that are coterminous with a local government district (which are usually large cities / unitary districts or equivalent—such as Liverpool, Leicester, and Bristol), please use Template:Infobox settlement.

— WP:UKCITIES

--Jza84 |  Talk  12:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I am not from Lancashire, but consider that last message a personal attack on Lancastrians - something you've been warned about before. I would like a full apology for that, saying I "put on a false front" and for misappropriating a fake consensus. There is a person at the end of the signature and I expect a minimum threshold of dignitiy, perhaps as much as I've given yourself. --Jza84 |  Talk  12:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Any particular reason you're removing the birthplace and deathplace fields from the infoboxes? The are in the box code to make things easier, and I'm not sure why you feel the need to remove the separate field for that information and put it with the dates? Ealdgyth - Talk 14:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Okies, whatever. I was just curious. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

AWB

Hi there, I'm new to AWB and I'm not entirely sure on how it works. I know you've helped in the past so I was wondering whether you could tell me what I need to do to use it. I've downloaded it here and I've also got the .NET framework but I don't know where to go from there. Cheers, Kaboooz LUFC ^T_C 11:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

David Bowie/Tadcaster/Doncaster

Hi. You may well be right. And I wish it were possible to see that interview again easily. Some of us didn't catch it at the time it was first shown, or even when repeated if at all. The Tadcaster reference has previously been undone by adherence to BowieWonderWorld's bio here (current reference number 6), stating that his father was (quote): "Haywood Stenton Jones (known as John), born at 41 St. Sepulchre Gate, Doncaster, Yorkshire DN1 1TD, on 21st November, 1912".

I'd appreciate a quick reply to this one, as it confuses me. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 00:43, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, again. Just watched part one, and he actually corrects Parky (who says Tadcaster)(quote): "well, somewhere between Tadcaster, Doncaster and York, actually". So the interview promotes the ambiguity, I think. However, I've no intention of reverting your change - not unless something more concrete comes up in support of any one of the towns mentioned. Best wishes. Ref ^(chew)(do) 01:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Cut & Paste moves

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently copied the contents of a page and pasted it into another with a different name. This is what we call a "cut and paste move", and it is very undesirable because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. The mechanism we use for renaming an article is to move it to a new name which both preserves the page's history and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. In most cases, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself by this process, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves to request the move by another. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keith D (talk • contribs)

To add to that, you are welcome to request deletion of edited redirects that prevent moves of pages by non-admins, using {{db-move}}. Moving by cut-and-paste is not allowed though. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 16:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Yorkshire edits

I am trying to make some constructive edits to the Yorkshire article. Please read the edit summaries and the talk page so that a discussion of needed changes can be held. Thanks.--Harkey Lodger (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for replying so quickly. The wording was rather awkward for the first sentence of an article.The edit was to make it more easily readable. The Northern English location can still be added in the header. I was also trying to avoid the dilemma of whether to use a historic county or an historic county. Please, can we discuss changes on the talk page?--Harkey Lodger (talk) 17:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Please can we discuss improvements to the article on the talk page? Terse edit comments are not a substitute for co-operative discussion to reach consensus. Many thanks for you contributions. --Harkey Lodger (talk) 08:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

If you add this tag {{inuse}} while you are actively editing, your editing should not be upset by technical edit conflicts.--Harkey Lodger (talk) 16:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - May 2008

Delivered May 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 11:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Per talk

MRSC has presented his rationale, and I believe Harkey has concerns; there are reasons on the talk page why your edits are objectionable. I was in the process of responding myself... if you had given me some time, you would've had my concerns in full. Looks like there are serveral users concerned with your contributions anyway and I would also like make clear again that WP:3RR applies regarding your edits. --Jza84 |  Talk  11:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I will be writing a report about your actions calling me a "troll" and "Lancastrian". I've had enough of your abuse. --Jza84 |  Talk  11:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I am not happy that you have credited me with statements that I did not make, please retract your edits on the talk page.--Harkey Lodger (talk) 12:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

You're at WP:WQA, here. --Jza84 |  Talk  12:42, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikiquette alert

I would like to alert you of concerns about your conduct; as I did on 10 December 2007, 13 January 2008 and 15 January 2008. You are encouraged to respond to the third-party comments at the Wikiquette alert here. Everyone wants to move forward with constructive and civil contributions and discussion, please show your commitment to that too. MRSC • Talk 11:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I regret we couldn't move forward together from the Wikiquette alert and the findings there have been rejected by you. As your conduct continues to cause concern to several editors, we have opened a requests for comment here, as a third stage in trying to resolve this dispute. MRSC • Talk 15:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

You are now making some serious claims about User:Jza84. I really hope this is a misunderstanding and not further evidence of poor conduct on your part. The naming convention vote was undertaken on the project page in 2004. see here. Jza84 did not even start editing until 2 years later. How can he be to blame? How can this be a dispute based on him? Your conduct appears to be getting worse still since Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Yorkshirian was filed. We all want to work together to create great articles. This is getting in the way, and we want to resolve it to everyones benefit. Please work with us. MRSC • Talk 20:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you do us a favour Yorkshirian? Can you let us know if you're going to partake in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Yorkshirian? If not, I'm happy to elevate this to the next level of dispute resolution; your work at the WP:PLACE talk page does little to help your reputation.

For the record, I joined Wikipedia in 2006, not 2004; you could've just asked, and assumed good faith. :) --Jza84 |  Talk  23:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Several attempts have been made to draw you into discussion about your poor conduct. The claims you have been making about Jza84 have turned out to be baseless on two occasions and you have provided no explanation of why you have made such shocking accusations. There is a limit to the extent to which other editors will assume the good faith of your actions. Please take a moment to stop this disruptive behaviour and address our concerns. Everyone wants to work constructively together, but your behaviour increasingly makes us believe that isn't something you want too. MRSC • Talk 04:42, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

These messages are not getting you anywhere. Your editing since the RFC was filed is getting increasingly disruptive, especially the claims about Jza84. You can't make such terrible claims in three places, have them found to be baseless and then just ignore it. This is why there is no point engaging with you. We need to resolve this dispute first. MRSC • Talk 05:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

In resepect of issues relating to your most recent conduct (specifically the claims about Jza84 and disruptive edits) I have noted the behaviour at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. MRSC • Talk 05:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Brigantes, again

Noticed you've added a "Brigantian Theatrical mask" to the Brigantes article. I, and no doubt others, would be interested to have some more details on that. I have read the Hartley/Fitts book in the late 80s/early 90s but can't remember anything about the mask in question. Look forward to hearing from you. Mhaille 17:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

RFC/USER discussion concerning you (Yorkshirian)

Hello, Yorkshirian. Please be aware that a request for comments has been filed concerning your conduct on Wikipedia. The RFC entry can be found by your name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Yorkshirian, where you may want to participate. -- — KieferSkunk (talk) — 00:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

(reply copied from User talk:KieferSkunk) One more note on the RFC: Yes, you have 30 days before the bot closes the RFC as stale, meaning that it hasn't gotten any traction. That is intended for disputes that have been resolved and were not properly closed. However, any admin may close it much sooner than that if it's clear that one party isn't going to cooperate with the process, or is just gaming the system, and your stating your intentions to sit on the RFC for 30 days is clearly a statement of non-cooperation. I would encourage you to post a response there now, as it will be a more organized forum than WQA for you to express your concerns about other people's behavior as well. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 15:34, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Yorkshirian for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harkey Lodger‎ (talk • contribs)

Sorry, I forgot to sign the previous post. It was unintentional as I thought the template would add my username.--Harkey Lodger (talk) 09:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: About a source

That's fine. The link wasn't working last night but seems to have been restored.

About an accusation.... Is it too much to ask for an apology for this fine mess? I'm sure if I'd accused you of such serious doctoring of naming conventions, you would be dining out on it forever more. I'm sure we've been here before... I feel an apology would go someway to making amends. --Jza84 |  Talk  16:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire banner

Thanks for catching my screwup on the {{WikiProject Yorkshire}} template, guess I was paying more attention to code than to imagry. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 23:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :) - Yorkshirian (talk) 20:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

typeface

Hallo, I wonder whether you know that on a modest size of screen the font you use (Algerian, I believe) is almost illegible? It's OK for a big heading like "BASIC INFORMATION", but it's a real struggle to read the rest of your User page and all but one section of your Talk page: it looks as if I'm seeing double. I'm using Firefox, Windows XP, and 1024x768 monitor. I was dropping by to mention that there's a currnet AFD for Mike Roberts, as you have commented on the article's talk page. PamD (talk) 07:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I've heard a couple of people say that, but it looks fine to me. Could you show me a screen shot of what you see please? I'll take a look at the AFD. Cheers. - Yorkshirian (talk) 22:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, only just noticed your reply. Can't quite work out how to show you a screen shot! Ideas? I can copy the screen shot and paste it into a Word doc, but then can't see how to upload to here. PamD (talk) 15:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:RievaulxAbbey_Yorkshire_04.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:RievaulxAbbey_Yorkshire_04.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 04:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Spring-heeled Jack

Thanks for adding a reference to this page. Unfortunately the web site you have used as a source is not accurate. The Sheffield Times was not founded until 1846 (see British Library newspaper catalogue for confirmation) and so cannot have published anything on SHJ in 1808. Most likely the quote given on the site you accessed is a muddled version of a newspaper article on the 1873 Sheffield scare. Mikedash (talk) 08:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:North Riding of Yorkshire

Neat !! A job well done.--Harkey Lodger (talk) 07:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! still got a fair bit to add to it an I'm gonna do one for West and (historic) East too. - Yorkshirian (talk) 20:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I like the abbeys bit. I nearly suggested that you add them because they were so important.--Harkey Lodger (talk) 09:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Liquorice

Hi User:Yorkshirian. I made this edit here before seeing your edit summary a few edits back. Rather than just revert what I've done, I thought I would suggest to you that you should maybe justify that categorisation with a comment in the main article and probably a citation also. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 15:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Infobox for EH and NT?

Have you ever noticed whether there are any infoboxes for English Heritage and/or National Trust sites? I would like to add something neat to some of the Yorkshire EH and NT properties. Their handbooks or websites have all the info. I just need a box (not a six foot one either !!!:-)...)--Harkey Lodger (talk) 19:02, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if they have any infoboxes yet, but I've made Category:English Heritage sites in Yorkshire if that is of some help, using List of English Heritage properties for reference but some of the Yorkshire ones don't have articles yet like Marmion Tower. The ones from "West Yorkshire" still need to be added and theyre in the general Category:English Heritage. - Yorkshirian (talk) 07:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I will ask around. I've searched the infobox pages, but no luck. Trouble is that there are so many nooks and crannies on Wikipedia where things get put away(a bit like my study!).

I am not sure in which direction you are heading with the Yorkshire article at the moment.Is it to be WP:SUMMARY style and if so what is the hierarchy of articles to be, please. Are there to be two articles as per discussed on the talk page. This would be an appropriate discussion at WP:YORKS where I have tried to open a debate. The members there must believe that Yorkshire exists (as do I) otherwise they wouldn't be writing about it.Also, if you notice, the WP:YORKS banner is on articles from places in areas belonging to the old county; the cultural one, which is arguably stronger than the governments administrative dictates.--Harkey Lodger (talk) 07:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the above Navboxes. They make life a lot easier. I made a dead simple Wikipedia:Infobox at Template:Infobox UKproperty using templates.It's not elegant coding but it works on the page !!--Harkey Lodger (talk) 15:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bronte sisters.jpg

Hi there. Why did you revert my upload of an image that was both more complete and higher-resolution? Mr. Absurd (talk) 23:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, okay. I think I'll crop it to be the same and upload it overtop, because it's higher resolution, and then I'll upload another one full-sized. Just out of curiosity, in which article did you prefer the smaller image? Mr. Absurd (talk) 21:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Robin Hood

Hi Yorkshirian, how about disussing the Robin Hood introduction on the talk page? You'll be glad to know I have read the references you cite, you might like to re-read them yourself! Regards, Jeremy (talk) 04:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

you say "vandalism," consensus says "good faith"

Hey Yorkshirian, if you keep calling good faith edits vandalism you will sooner or later get blocked. This is still some ways from happening but you can't keep doing this without stirring up all kinds of woe. This is a description of what's called vandalism on Wikipedia. Edits you don't agree with, edits you think are stupid or clumsy, unsourced or boneheaded, are not vandalism, even if they seem so amazingly dumb to you that so far as you care, they are vandalism. Nobody is asking you to change your way of thinking, only your way of editing. You can think of all Wikipedia as one big docking act of vandalism but please, don't describe good faith edits as vandalism in edit summaries or on talk pages. Keep it to yourself, you'll get a lot more done here. All the best to you! :) Gwen Gale (talk) 09:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire - June 2008 Newsletter

Delivered June 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 11:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Angeln.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Angeln.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:LeedsCityArms.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:LeedsCityArms.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Arbitration Request Filed

Hi there. This notice is to inform you that a Request for Arbitration has been filed regarding the ongoing cultural dispute between yourself and several other editors. The Arbitration Committee will decide on whether this case should be heard and pursued. Thank you. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:HS LL in Yorkshire

Template:HS LL in Yorkshire has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — MRSC • Talk 17:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Your personal attacks on other editors

I have copied this message from the principal talk page which alerted me to this (Talk:Association of British Counties‎) I note the personal attacks you have made in this discussion. I took a look at your editing history today as a result, and found numerous examples of bad-faith assumptions in material you have edited and edit summaries, including an allegation on a TfD comment that was certainly unacceptable. I am advising you publically now that if you persist in doing this, you will be blocked until you give an undertaking to stop your personal attacks. I will copy this message to your talk page. If you feel the need to send a message to me, it should necessarily include as a major part of it words to the effect of "I apologize" and "I promise not to indulge in personal attacks again", and such sentiments should also be included in messages you leave to the editors you have treated like this.  DDStretch  (talk) 22:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I have blocked you indefinately, given your response on my talk page in the light of all your previous noted acts of personally attacking others. Until and unless you are prepared to give an undertaking to stop doing so, I will not lift the block. I will inform the RfC and the Arbcom procedings about this.  DDStretch  (talk) 08:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Request for Unblock

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).

Yorkshirian (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

DDStretch has violated the Wikipedia:Banning policy by banning me indefinetly because he does not agree with my personal stances.[1] He claims his reason for blocking me is "personal attacks" and "harassment" despite providing absoutely no diffs to prove either. And in fact on his talkpage, I pointed out to him that I was being harrassed.[2] On the basis that DDStretch has gone through non of the proper channels and is blatantly discriminating against me, I request to be unblocked. This user is a completey inexperienced admin (only gaining powers last week) and is apparently not familiar with any of our policies, in light of that his mistake can be forgiven once the block is lifted. - Yorkshirian (talk) 08:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I was considering doing something similar to this myself and I am completely uninvolved. The indef remains until the community decides what it wants to do about you. — Viridae^Talk 08:36, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

---

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).

Yorkshirian (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

The Community process on Arbitration has no way to conclude until I have filled out my section on it. Which I cannot do as I have, wrongly (as per the official Banning policy) been blocked, with no diffs provided as evidence for what DDStretch is accusing me of. DDStretch's only rationale is apparently that he likes Jza and not me, which is not how policy words. - Yorkshirian (talk) 08:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Write it here - a clerk will paste it to the correct page. — Viridae^Talk 09:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

---

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.

After discussion with the blocking admin, and with the likelihood that an arbitration case may be accepted, I am prepared to unblock you on the following conditions:

1. You do not make any edits concerning administrative subdivisions of the United Kingdom, whether current or historical.
2. You do not comment on the edits of any other party to the arbitration case, save as part of it (in other words, in your comment on the request, or on the case pages if it is accepted)

Making personal attacks on other users is unacceptable at any time. My reason for offering this is that you make useful contributions away from the field of traditional British counties which you should be able to continue making. Please indicate if you accept these terms. Sam Blacketer (talk) 10:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm willing to accept. Just to clarify on the details; by administrative divisions do you mean topics relating to Association of British Counties and controversial topics regarding what is and isn't a "current border"? I'm not sure I entirely understand the second condition if you could explain; am I allowed to fill out my part on the Arbitration case, presented in full? Regards. - Yorkshirian (talk) 10:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

The first condition is wide-ranging and includes edits relating to borders of administrative subdivisions, as well as anything relating to British counties - traditional or otherwise. Basically it means staying away from the whole area. The second condition allows you to participate fully and write anything you wish as a response to the request for arbitration, and then as part of the case; it just restricts you on article talk pages to not follow around any of the others in this dispute on issues other than administrative subdivisions. Sam Blacketer (talk) 10:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

OK. - Yorkshirian (talk) 10:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

RFAR

Your statement at RFAR is excessively long. Please trim it to within the 500 word guideline. Thank you. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:52, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I have trimmed your statement to meet the 500-word limit at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian. The original statement can be found on the case's talk page. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 18:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

You were instructed to trim your statement to meet the 500-word guideline. Since you failed to do so, I had to trim it myself. As you said yourself, the "outline" is an outline. It's a summary of your entire statement (at least, it should be). I've already made a note on the case page that your entire statement can be found on the case talk page. This is normal case procedure. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 19:00, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

The arbitrators primarily look at the evidence and workshop pages. You don't have any size limitations, so you can present your entire case on those pages. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 19:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

See the opening of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian. The pages you should pay attention to: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian/Workshop, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian/Evidence, and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian/Proposed decision. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 19:16, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 19:10, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

STOP being disruptive on the arb case. If you don't stop, you will be blocked. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:23, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Yorkshirian, Rlevse was correct to warn you. We are following ArbCom case procedure. When we move a full statement to the ArbCom talk page, we will make a note on the case page of our move. That is sufficient enough notice of our action. Jza84's link to his trimming is acceptable because he trimmed his statement by himself. Note that his original statement was not posted to the case talk page. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 19:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Eh, link added. Want to calm down now? Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 20:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Newsletter - July 2008

Delivered July 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 12:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Naming conventions

Everywhere else it's Roman Catholic Diocese of X. I'm well aware of the current turmoil, which is why I'm arguing against exceptionalism for England and Wales. Benkenobi18 (talk) 20:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

These are the official diocese names. Take it up with Catholic Heirarchy. Benkenobi18 (talk) 20:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:GozoFA.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:GozoFA.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC)