Wikipedia

User talk:Renamed user df576567etesddf/Archive 16

< User talk:Renamed user df576567etesddf
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Cliftonian in topic A barnstar for you!
Archive 10←Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18

The Signpost: 29 July 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hugh Beadle

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Cliftonian! I'm gradually working through this fine article for a synopsis in FC. There's a section which is headed "Chief Justice", but it doesn't seem to say explicitly when Beadle became CJ. Was it when he took up the seat? No hurry for a reply- I'm limited to 75-150 words, so I'll probably skip that appointment. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 14:54, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Xantho. He became Chief Justice in 1961. I'm afraid I couldn't find the date. Cheers, keep well. —  Cliftonian (talk)  14:57, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 15:01, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 August 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Talk:Gukurahundi

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. You're invited to comment here. Thanks. Selector99 (talk) 22:16, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Selector. —  Cliftonian (talk)  22:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Concensus it the bees knees, Cliftonian! Thanks for the edit. Selector99 (talk) 23:29, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Cheers chap. —  Cliftonian (talk)  23:38, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar for You!

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
  The Good Article Barnstar
For your contributions to bring Roderigo Lopez to Good Article status.  — Calvin999 18:56, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much Calvin—very kind. I'm glad you liked the article. —  Cliftonian (talk)  19:08, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Reminder

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hey Cliftonian,

Sorry to bug you, but I just wanted to remind you of the Battle of Malvern Hill FAC. Poked you a few weeks ago, thought a reminder was due. Cheers! --ceradon (talk • edits) 13:46, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Cheers Ceradon. —  Cliftonian (talk)  14:03, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 August 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Request for comment

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion on the deprecation of Template:English variant notice. Since you've had some involvement with the English variant notice template, you might want to participate in the discussion if you have not already done so.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 07:20, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the note Godsy. —  Cliftonian (talk)  00:56, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Some way to make a guide for a highly detailed map

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hello Cliftonian. Thanks for your comments on Malvrn Hill; they've been extremely helpful. I have a question: if you look at File:Revised Union battleplan for the Battle of Malvern Hill.jpg, there are scores of details marked. Is there a way I can make... perhaps a box... in the notes maybe... that lists every one of those details, and... maybe impossible but... finds some way to link to them or locate them on the actual map? Using a grid over the map would obviously only make a very busy map much busier, so that's out... Tks • Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 08:42, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean here Lingzhi, I'm sorry. —  Cliftonian (talk)  23:51, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Imagine a picture atop a page. A highly detailed, hard to read picture. Imagine a list (in any order, but alphabetical is most likely) somewhere else on the page that lists very detail on that image. Perhaps the list could have a border to separate it visually, or perhaps not. When you click any item in the list, something happens to show you the location of that detail on the image. Maybe a link takes you to the image, and a dot appears where that specific detail is. So f you want to find Semmes's brigade in the map on Battle of Malvern Hill, you'd go to that list, click the list item "Semmes", and presto, you'd be shown where Semmes was. Does that make more sense?• Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 00:06, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Okay, I think I understand now. I will think about this and try to figure out a way to do something along these lines. Thanks for the explanation. —  Cliftonian (talk)  00:16, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Sisters at Heart

Latest comment: 9 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hi John,

Might you be willing to review another article I've written? It's called Sisters at Heart and is hopefully less controversial than my last FAC. I always appreciate your comments, and would appreciate whatever contributions you have time to provide at the FAC.

Neelix (talk) 21:30, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Of course. I see it was directed by my distant kinsman William; good to see holders of the Asher name making constructive contributions to society. I've already promised to review the Battle of Malvern Hill and am halfway through that one, so if it's okay with you I will finish that before I move on to this. Thanks and I hope you're well David. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  01:42, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
All done. I hope this helps David. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  03:39, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the review and support, John! I see that you are moving house; I hope that is going well for you. I can understand if you are too busy, but if you have time, I would be grateful if you would contribute a source review to the FAC as well. I think that's all the FAC needs before it can be successfully closed. Neelix (talk) 20:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I'll try to find time David. Hope you're well. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 August 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Alf Ramsey

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Thanks for taking this article in hand. I am away from home for several weeks, but when I get back in the UK I'll dig my Southampton FC books out and see what they have to say about his playing career there. Thanks again. 77.130.200.119 (talk) 16:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC) (previously known as Bikeroo)

Thank you Bikeroo. I am also away from home until early September. Just in case you were not aware, my edits on the Sir Alf article today were the start of a collaborative effort along with The Rambling Man and Dweller, both of whom I'm pinging here—we already have a discussion thread on this open at The Rambling Man's talk page and it may be best to keep all relevant conversation together. In any case, any assistance you could give us regarding Ramsey's time at Southampton would be most welcome—whether you prefer to add the information yourself or whether you prefer to provide the info to one of us to make the additions. Thanks again and I hope you're well. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  16:46, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIII, August 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Israel Defense Forces

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi! I noticed this edit. I know that "defense" is american english, nevertheless the official name in english of IDF is Israel Defense Forces. I suggest to avoid any alternative spelling. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 15:42, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi there Basilicofresco, thanks for the note. This article is in Irish English, to reflect Herzog's native form of the language, and in Irish English the word is "defence", as in British English. I can confirm from my own personal experience in the IDF that while the American "Defense" is the form usually favoured in their English-language writing, they are not pernickerty about spelling and do use the spelling "Defence" in an official manner as well where appropriate. In my opinion it is preferable to use "defence" in this case to preserve consistency within the Herzog article. In any case it is clear what is meant. Thanks and I hope this is okay with you. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  17:31, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Rod Steiger

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Evening, any chance you could provide some input at the peer review?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:22, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Sure, will try to find time. —  Cliftonian (talk)  05:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 August 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 02 September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Alf Ramsey

Latest comment: 9 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Now there's a a collaboration I'd like to see! CassiantoTalk 17:47, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Lekker stuff indeed. Am enjoying myself immensely. —  Cliftonian (talk)  20:36, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm looking at it now thinking it could be our magnum opus. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:43, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
I'll certainly drink to that sir. I have a busy week or two now but hopefully I will be able to give this undertaking its proper attention all the same. —  Cliftonian (talk)  20:47, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Having noted that you are the proudest father of Cliftonian Jr, and noting that you are also busy doing things abroad etc, I'm not surprised. Your input is not just welcomed and encouraged, it's expected and anticipated. Look forward to more soon. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
I have in fact arrived back in Blighty this very evening. As I'm sure you can understand returning after a few years away occasions a great many errands in the first week or two. But as I now have access to relevant books in the shops, libraries etc I think I will be able to contribute much more now. —  Cliftonian (talk)  20:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Welcome back! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:04, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
It's good to be back! Cheers. —  Cliftonian (talk)  15:17, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Flying aces

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Thanks for two, precious again, and good wishes for the move and your family, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda. It is very much appreciated. :) —  Cliftonian (talk)  15:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 16 September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Bugle: Issue CXIV, September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:08, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Sci-Fi Dine-In Theater Restaurant

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi John,

I have another article up for featured status: the Sci-Fi Dine-In Theater Restaurant article. You have been very generous with your time in contributing to my FACs in the past, so please feel no obligation to participate in yet another one, but if you do have the time and would be interested, your thoughts would be greatly appreciated in the discussion. I hope you are enjoying your new job!

Neelix (talk) 03:21, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks David. I'll try to find time over the next few days. Hope you're well, cheers! —  Cliftonian (talk)  08:02, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the encouragement, John! No worries about not getting over in time. I have nominated the article to go up on the main page here; feel free to contribute to that discussion if you are interested. Neelix (talk) 17:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Bootham Crescent

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, would you be interested in taking a look at Bootham Crescent, which is up at FAC? Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 13:05, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I'll do my best Matty, but I'm finding myself rather tied up at the moment. Hope you're well and having a pleasant weekend. —  Cliftonian (talk)  17:11, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Assassination of Spencer Perceval

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I thought Wikipedia:Peer review/Assassination of Spencer Perceval/archive1 might interest you. Any comments you can provide will be most welcome. I hope you are well. Brianboulton (talk) 22:11, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm doing well thanks. I'll try to find some time, probably later today. Hope you're having a nice weekend as well. —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:21, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

And you thought Spencer Perceval was obscure...

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

...well, I wonder if I can interest you in Streatham's leading non-Irish Irish composer, who is now at PR? All comments gladly received if you're inclined to look in. (Quite understand if you're not.) – Tim riley talk 18:43, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

You are talking to the man who writes about Southern Rhodesia, Tim! Don't think anything's too obscure for me!! I would be happy to have a look in at Arnold and I will try to find some time over the next few days. Hope you're well as we enter October. Cheers! —  Cliftonian (talk)  18:57, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Comments gratefully received! Thank you, sir! Tim riley talk 17:39, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

July to September 2015 Reviewing Award

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
   Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) 
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you the Content Review Medal of Merit for a creditable 8 FA, A-Class, Peer and GA reviews during the period July to September 2015. Well done! Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 10:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Thank you very much Peacemaker! Very much appreciated. Cheers! —  Cliftonian (talk)  10:51, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

אתה אוטיסט בקטע רע

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Stream of bile in Hebrew, ending "I hope you kill yourself". —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:56, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

קשה לי להאמין שגייסו אותך לצה"ל אתה נראה חנון בעייתי ומציק

החלטת למחוק לכל הישראלים המצליחים את המילה "יהודי" כי אתה אוטו-אנטישמי

או כי ההורים שלך אחים? אולי זה סתם אוטיזם טהור? מקווה שתתאבד. 79.180.114.6 (talk) 21:23, 6 October 2015 (UTC)|English: You are an evil autistic. It's hard for me to believe they accepted you into the Israeli Army you're a troublesome and annoying geek. You decided to remove from all the successful Israelis the word "Jew" because you're an auto-anti-Semite. Or because your parents are brother and sister? Maybe you're just pure autistic? I hope you kill yourself.}}

אני לא צריך לקבל שטויות האלה. אני נתתי שנתיים מחיי לעזור למדינה שלך ולהגן עליך ועל משפחתך. גם שמרתי על ערבים, דרוזים וכ'ו. הם אזרחי מדינת ישראל על בדיוק אותו הרמה כמוך. תקבל את זה. יום טוב לך אדוני.|English: I don't need to take this crap. I gave two years of my life to help your country and to defend you and your family. I guarded Arabs, Druze etc too. They're citizens of the State of Israel exactly the same as you. Accept that. Good day to you sir.}} —  Cliftonian (talk)  06:58, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Re:

 
Hello, Renamed user df576567etesddf. You have new messages at Katangais's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Signpost: 07 October 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Tank Girl at FAC

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. I'm leaving this same message to everyone who commented at the first FAC nomination for Tank Girl (film). After having gone through improvements including a thorough copyedit courtesy of the guild of copyeditors, the article has been renominated – see here. All comments are welcome. Cheers. Freikorp (talk) 09:45, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Freikorp. I'll be there. —  Cliftonian (talk)  10:15, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 October 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

October 2015 - Edit warring

Latest comment: 9 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
Fatuous, groundless accusation of edit warring. See Talk:Natalie Portman. —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:56, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

  Hello, I'm Yossimgim. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Natalie Portman, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history 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. — Yossimgim Talk/Stalk 22:38, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

 
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Natalie Portman. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

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 and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. 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.
You can't use Wikipedia, English or Hebrew, as a source. — Yossimgim Talk/Stalk 22:43, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Please explain to me how my behaviour constitutes edit-warring, Yossimgim? I opened a discussion that went on for two weeks, then waited until over a week had gone by without any new additions to the thread before editing boldly. An IP reverted me saying this "conflicted with talk page discussion". In fact since making the bold change there had been only two new posts and both supported the change. I reverted on that basis. You have just now reverted again with the edit summary "see talk page". And you have the gall to post this template on my talk page, as if I'm in the wrong. Some explanation, if you please? —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:37, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Well, you should discuss that with us on the related talk page of Natalie Portman. We ask you once again not to engage in an edit war. Yossimgim (talk) 07:41, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm not the one engaging in an edit war here. And who's "we"? —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:47, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Assassination of Spencer Perceval

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This is a notification to all the recent PR contributors that the above article is now at FAC. Comments welcomed there. Brianboulton (talk) 23:14, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

I'll be there. —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Frank Jenner

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi John,

I'm sorry to hear that you have been experiencing personal attacks from sock puppets; I hope they have been clearing up. Might you be willing to do a source review for my current FAC? There have already been three editors who have supported the candidacy and one who has performed an image review, so what remains is a source review. I appreciated your source review for the Sisters at Heart FAC and hope you have time to perform another.

Neelix (talk) 22:13, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the note David. I have indeed been having ridiculous insults thrown at me, as can be seen above—particularly galling is that the people throwing the insults recently have been the ones I travelled thousands of miles to put my life on the line for. I think this nonsense reveals more about them than about me so I've chosen to leave it there.
Anyway, I'll do my best to do a source review for Frank this evening. Thanks and I hope you're well. Cheers! —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:46, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for participating in this FAC, John! You are a great editor who has made many valuable contributions to Wikipedia. I'm glad the ridiculous insults have not slowed you down; opposition is to be expected when accomplishing something worthwhile. I just realized that you have gotten twenty articles up to featured status, exactly double my count. Nicely done! Neelix (talk) 18:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you David, I appreciate that. Nicely done to you too. —  Cliftonian (talk)  18:25, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

PR request

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hey Cliftonian, any chance you could review this one? It's been sitting in the queue without attracting any reviews for quite sometime. —Vensatry (ping) 18:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I'll try to find the time to look in, Vensatry. Good luck! —  Cliftonian (talk)  19:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Since you PRed the article should you be interested in reviewing the FAC? Thanks, —Vensatry (Talk) 10:22, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Peer review request

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

If I can possibly interest you in yet another English composer – one of the top three, in my view – I have Ralph Vaughan Williams up for peer review. Quite understand if you are otherwise engaged, naturally, but if you can look in, any comments will be gratefully received. – Tim riley talk 18:32, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the note! Of course I will do my best to find the time to have a look. —  Cliftonian (talk)  19:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 October 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

List of Luton Town F.C. seasons

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I've been trying to fix links to Jack Taylor (footballer). Most of them were for Jack Taylor (footballer, born 1914). The last link to fix is on the page List of Luton Town F.C. seasons and indicates that the top scorer in 1951-52 was "Jack Taylor", however none of the footballer articles is a suitable match. You created the article, could you check and see if the top scorer was Jack Taylor or if that's an error? Thanks. Tassedethe (talk) 18:57, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Tassedethe; thanks for the note. I've just had a look in Luton Town Football Club: The Full Record by Roger Wash and Simon Pitts (2014 edition, published by Luton Town F.C.'s official historian Roger Wash) and indeed page 100, detailing Luton's 1951–52 campaign in the old Second Division, shows Jack Taylor as top scorer with 20 League goals and 4 in the FA Cup. Page 287 records him as "Jack E Taylor" with a total of 85 League apps and 29 League goals for Luton, with 6 appearances and 4 goals in the Cup.
The dearly missed Neil Brown's site has a profile for this Jack Taylor here, and has him born on 11 September 1924 in Chilton (doesn't say which Chilton)—it would appear he also played for Wolves, Notts County and Bradford Park Avenue.
Hope this helps... sorry not to have anything more concrete. Anyway, yes, I can say with some certainty that the 1951–52 top scorer for Luton was indeed Jack Taylor. —  Cliftonian (talk)  19:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, that was quick! Tassedethe (talk) 19:17, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Anyone fancy having a look at Gregor MacGregor, king of the con-men?

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I don't normally do this, but poor Gregor MacGregor has been awaiting a GA review for almost three months now. If one of the people kind enough to watch my talk page might find the time to have a look at his article, I would appreciate it very much. —  Cliftonian (talk)  20:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much Maile66 for taking Gregor in hand. Very much appreciated. —  Cliftonian (talk)  16:15, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

British Empire a Superpower?

Latest comment: 9 years ago12 comments3 people in discussion

Hi Cliftonian, I need an outside opinion, I'm discussing whether the British Empire was a "Superpower", whereas the other editor disagrees, but c'mon, look at these: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. They all call the British Empire a superpower> Not to mention, these dictionaries applied to the Empire's position during it's heyday [10], [11]. (N0n3up (talk) 17:35, 28 October 2015 (UTC))

@N0n3up: I'll have a look later. Thanks for the note and I hope you're well. —  Cliftonian (talk)  17:45, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank You Cliftonian, I very much appreciate it. (N0n3up (talk) 18:31, 28 October 2015 (UTC))
It's really no problem, I'm glad to be a help. —  Cliftonian (talk)  20:57, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
I am saddened to let you know that there was no agreement or resolution reached but the opposite that I had to take it to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, I would like to thank you for trying to help out. He even threatened me about Edit-Warring when I haven't even reverted his edit.(N0n3up (talk) 15:39, 29 October 2015 (UTC))
I'm sorry too, N0n3up, but I'm not sure ANI is the right venue for this. I would suggest opening an RFC as LjL has suggested to you there, then posting on relevant noticeboards such as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history to get some more views. I hope this helps and that you're well. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  16:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Cliftonian, the problem is the disagreement to consider the British Empire a Superpower, something it was suggesting the Industrial Revolution as an example, yet they only think of the Cold War and etc.. Even During WWII, Britain was one of the "Big Three". (N0n3up (talk) 16:35, 29 October 2015 (UTC))
Certainly during the rough period 1920–45 I would see no problem with describing the British Empire as one of the world's superpowers. It could even go back further. I liked the compromise someone suggested on the article talk page of calling Britain a superpower in the context of the early 20th century. —  Cliftonian (talk)  16:52, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Finally! someone who understands. Thank you Cliftonian. Mind if I use your post for the consensus in the talk page? because it seems that denying the fact of the British Empire being a Superpower has gone too far to ignoring the sources. (N0n3up (talk) 17:00, 29 October 2015 (UTC))
Sure, no problem. —  Cliftonian (talk)  19:11, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi again Cliftonian. I'm sorry to bother you again, but Snowded has gone beyond the boundaries of reason. He reverted the changes done to the page, even the small grammatical fixes and not reconise that he is ignoring sources and keeps making up any excuse to contradict me. He won't let anyone edit the page, he even reverted another editor's edit [12] which you can see here is there has been made some grammatical fixes apart from the Superpower topic we were talking about, but I added that phrase after I thought we reached a consensus between you, me and Snowded. There's even another editor who protested his attitude and he just seems to do what he does out of pride. (N0n3up (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2015 (UTC))

British Empire superpower DR/N

 

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Not filing party, just letting you know. Cheers, Drcrazy102 (talk) 05:39, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 October 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your GA nomination of Gregor MacGregor

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The article Gregor MacGregor you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Gregor MacGregor for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. — Maile (talk) 21:18, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Huzzah! —  Cliftonian (talk)  21:19, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello how are you. i'm having a personal attack with the User:Knowledgebattle, a user throwing personal opinion upon the articles, so i undo his edit's. as here and here. I found you also undo some of his edit's as here, he is pushing the Category:Christianity-related beheadings in different places even when it's not related. This not the first time that i handel his harrasment as stalking and undo my edit for several times and when he called uneducated. It's interesting when he called me Christian-propaganda, when his articles been deleted for being full of propganda. Have a nice day.Jobas (talk) 12:51, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jobas, I'm with you on this but I'm afraid I don't hold any status any higher than Knowledgebattle so there isn't really very much I can do here beyond reverting his edits and getting into an edit war. I suggest you take this issue to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and describe the case there as you have to me. Thanks and good luck. —  Cliftonian (talk)  12:58, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 November 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

HAPPY 50TH UDI

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
 

A day to remember! Thanks to you people can!Foofbun (talk) 08:50, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, if it brings a smile to even a few people, it was worth it. A day to remember indeed. Hope you're well. —  Cliftonian (talk)  09:20, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Gerda; most kind. :) —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:38, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Alf Ramsey

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Great work. I'll catch up with things when I can. Feel free to nudge me. --Dweller (talk) 09:45, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Cheers. Will do. —  Cliftonian (talk)  09:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

X-born versus born in X

Latest comment: 9 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. I noticed your edits to Poles in the United Kingdom, Israelis in the United Kingdom and Japanese community in the United Kingdom, whereby you changed "X-born" to "born in X". I don't have a problem with that per se, but there a lot of articles that use the former formulation, so I thought I'd ask to explain your rationale in a bit more detail. Many sources use the term "foreign-born population", and the ONS uses the term "Polish-born", as does the BBC. If there is a reason to reject this wording in Wikipedia articles, then there are many of them that need changing, and in editing and updating them I've tried as much as possible to employ consistent language across them. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:45, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi there Larry—thanks for taking the time to post a note here rather than just reverting. The crux of my reasoning here is that under most countries' nationality laws citizenship is transmitted according to the citizenship of the parents (jus sanguinis) rather than according to the location of the birth (jus soli). For example, let's say a person is born in Poland to two UK-citizen parents. Polish nationality law operates according to jus sanguinis, so if neither parent is a Polish citizen, neither is the child. British nationality law also uses jus sanguinis, so the kid is born a British citizen.
Because statistics on migration such as those in that BBC source generally operate purely according to the place of birth, people such as this would be included in the statistics for people born in Poland. That notwithstanding it seems rather odd to me to say this person is "Polish-born", when in fact it is more accurate to say he is "born in Poland" or "Poland-born". By the same token, because the children of British citizens born in Poland would be citizens of the UK at birth—that is, they would never have to undergo naturalisation—it could be said that they are just as much "British-born" as their parents.
Of course, this doesn't apply where citizenship is transmitted purely based on the location of the birth. Anybody born in the US or Canada, for example, is automatically a citizen of the country in question, regardless of the parents' nationalities. In these cases I do not have such a strong objection to the "American-born"/"Canadian-born" wording.
Going back to the BBC source: the usage is mixed, and actually seems to agree with me in a lot of places. Look under France, Portugal, Belgium, Australia and Romania for example (there are many others): the wording "born in X" is the one used at the top in every case ("Concentrations of people born in Romania", for example), and I would say overall you have a shade more instances of the country form ("France-born"/"Japan-born") than the demonym form ("French-born"/"Japanese-born").
Let's look at the ONS Population by Country of Birth and Nationality Report, August 2015. The preferred wording seems to me to be "born in X" or "country-born" as opposed to "demonym-born". Throughout reference is made to "UK born" people and "non-UK born" people, not "British-born" and "non-British-born". The main findings on the first page say "An estimated 793,000 usual residents of the UK were born in India"—not "Indian-born" (though that wording does appear later in the report). There is not a single usage of "Polish-born", while "Poland born" appears five times. Likewise "Pakistan born" appears twice.
Now, I understand that the demonym form in this wording—"Polish-born", "Japanese-born" etc—doesn't necessarily refer to the people in question; that is, it may refer to the birth itself as being Polish, or Japanese, or whatever. That may be so, but I think it is unclear and potentially somewhat confusing. It also leads to the common problem on Wikipedia where overseas birthplaces are given undue weight in the opening sentences of biographies. It is a common usage but I see no reason not to be more clear if it is only one or two words more.
The issue of "foreign-born" vs "overseas-born" is a peripheral issue I'm not so concerned about, though I'd prefer the latter as I think it's more accurate according to the same reasoning I've given above. "Foreign-born" could be taken to imply that the person was born a foreigner, but actually what is meant is that the birth itself was foreign as it was outside the country's borders. I hope this makes sense? Anyway, as I said before, "foreign-born" vs "overseas-born" isn't such a major issue for me.
I hope this all makes sense and that you're well. Thanks and have a great rest of the week. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  08:15, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your extensive reply. I was initially confused by your mention of citizenship in edit summaries and at the start of your comment above, but if I understand correctly then you think that "Polish-born" could be taken to mean born with Polish citizenship? I hadn't considered that possibility before, and always took it to be fairly obviously synonymous with "born in Poland". Now that you have highlighted this, however, I see the potential for confusion. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:00, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that's exactly my point. Thanks for understanding; I'm sorry about the confusion before. —  Cliftonian (talk)  18:09, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
No need to apologise - the confusion was mostly down to my own inability to recognise the possibility that it could have been understood in that way, which now you've pointed it out seems fairly obvious. I will reconsider how I phrase this type of material in future. The "X-born" formulation was kind of useful for infoboxes, because it is concise, but I'm sure "born in X" can be used without too many problems. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:25, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much Larry. I'll leave it up to you. I hope you're well and having a pleasant evening. —  Cliftonian (talk)  18:42, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
PS: This ping didn't work, because the pinged user only gets notified if you include the ping in the same edit in which you sign your comment. I only learned this myself through being told by another editor who I had tried but failed to ping. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:04, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Ah, sorry about that. Duly noted; thanks for the explanation. —  Cliftonian (talk)  18:09, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Bessie Braddock peer review

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

If you can find the time, I'd be most interested to hear any comments you have concerning this lady, like me a Liverpudlian – a bit before my time, although I certainly remember her later years and the reactions to her death. No special hurry, it'll be at PR for a while. Brianboulton (talk) 16:04, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Gladly. I'll be there. I look forward to the education. —  Cliftonian (talk)  16:10, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 November 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Bugle: Issue CXVI, November 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 November 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

ArbCom elections are now open!

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Bessie B.

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I am about to close the Braddock peer review, here. Please don't feel any obligation to add any comments, but if you're so inclined it should be done soon. All good wishes, Brianboulton (talk) 11:23, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the nudge Brian. I'll try to find some time later today. —  Cliftonian (talk)  11:34, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 November 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Bessie Braddock FAC

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The above article, to the PR of which you recently contributed, is now at FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 22:21, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 December 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

New York Cosmos (1970 -1985)

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Sorry, I was trying to restore your edit, not sure what I did. I was unable to revert old vandalism, but I couldn't with your edit there. Red Jay (talk) 12:21, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

No problem at all. I appreciate the note. Hope you're well, cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  12:43, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

A little celebration

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
 

A little celebration in honor of Gregor MacGregor's FA. Congratulations. — Maile (talk) 13:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Och aye! Thank you Maile, very much appreciated. Thanks for your help along the way as well! Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and all your loved ones. —  Cliftonian (talk)  18:41, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 December 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A barnstar for you!

Latest comment: 8 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion
  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
All those GA, FA, A and FL articles and lists are great. כל הכבוד! Dat GuyWiki (talk) 16:18, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Well, this is a very nice surprise. Thanks, Dat GuyWiki! Very much appreciated. תודה רבה ידידי :) —  Cliftonian (talk)  16:36, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
I also wondered if you'd like to collaborate on an Israeli related article? Dat GuyWiki (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Depends, I'm rather busy at the moment—which one? —  Cliftonian (talk)  16:38, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Not really sure. I could start digging for some sports information maybe. Also, not trying to rush you, just a suggestion :). Dat GuyWiki (talk) 16:52, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
No problem at all, and don't worry, I didn't think you were rushing me. I already have two on the go, as it were, as I am part of the Alf Ramsey collaboration at the moment and also have my own draft I am working on in a sandbox, so I fear I don't really have the spare time to devote to another one right now, but if you have a look around for something to do with sports that may well be something I'd enjoy working on with you sometime in the future (especially if it's football). In the meantime if you work on anything yourself and if you'd ever like a few pointers, some copy-editing, a review or what have you, feel free to drop me a note any time and I'll see what I can do. Thanks again for the barnstar, a nice Christmas gift indeed. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  16:58, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
By the way, I saw you nominated Sir Alf for GA about an hour ago. I appreciate the sentiment here, but I'm working on this with a couple of other editors as part of a long-term project and I don't think the article is ready for GA yet. In any case the GAN instructions advise that the main contributors should be consulted first if the nominator is not one himself. As you nominated the article, you would have been considered responsible for answering whatever issues the reviewer raised, and since you weren't the one who wrote the prose and looked in the sources etc that would have been a bit awkward. I've therefore withdrawn the nomination for now, but I appreciate that you meant the nomination as a vote of confidence. Thanks and I hope this makes sense. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  17:02, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Yes, sorry about that GAN. Anyways, merry christmas, a merry new year and happy Hannukah. Dat GuyWiki (talk) 17:06, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
It's no problem, don't worry. Feel free to drop me a note if there's ever any way I can lend a hand. "Happy New Year", not "Merry New Year" ;). Chag haMolad Sameach, Shana Tova v'Chanukah Sameach gam l'kha adoni. :) —  Cliftonian (talk)  17:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Renamed_user_df576567etesddf/Archive_16&oldid=1214920547"