SillyWilly

who are u and y did u say that? 81.86.13.173 08:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

What's it to you? SillyWilly 23:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Question about possible copyvio

Hi, there. I have recently been deleting copyvio in the episode summaries of Scrubs (TV series) articles, and came across several articles that you created that are not from the most common source of the copyvio, tv.com and scrubs-tv.com. I'd just like to confirm that you created the episode summaries yourself, just to be sure that I've removed the last of the copyvio. If you did, thanks, it saved me a good hour of hunting through pages :). Since you have been recently adding episode summaries, you'd probably also be interested that the first three seasons are now lacking episode summaries, so if you have motivation to do so, they are looking for some work now, too. Thanks. Cowman109^Talk 19:11, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi! No need to worry, I've been writing the summaries myself. I'll see what I can do about the earlier seasons. SillyWilly 20:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, alright. Thanks :D Cowman109^Talk 20:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

My Changing Ways

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article My Changing Ways, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Oo7565 20:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been reverted by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [1]. --Maniwar (talk) 21:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Monmouth School

An article that you have been involved in editing, Monmouth School, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monmouth School. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?Redgator5 (talk) 02:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Fuck thank you

Thank you for your spoken word recording of Fuck (film), much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 19:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! I couldn't resist an opportunity to say Fuck so many time in one recording ;) SillyWilly (talk) 22:29, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

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

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

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, SillyWilly. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Monmouth School

Hi. Your recent move of this article doesn't seem to be supported by the official record unless the school URN is wrong. Is this something someone at the school decided without telling the authorities? Fob.schools (talk) 15:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC).

The name has certainly changed,[2], but they may well have not got round to updating the government record. All part of a, misguided in my view, marketing campaign to create a “Haberdashers Monmouth Schools” brand. Robert Glover will be turning in his grave. When I went for my interview, my father called it MSfB, and was witheringly told that the name was Monmouth School. KJP1 (talk) 18:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Who decides the name, the school or the govt? Does a name change on a school's own website trump the official name? WP:COMMON isn't crystal clear on this. Is there an operating company, or charity/trust, that is the corporate instance of the school? What is its name? I'm not yet convinced that this move satisfies anything except the school's new marketing supremo's ambition. Fob.schools (talk) 11:35, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

I think the Haberdashers’ Company, which owns the school, could call it Lalaland if it so chose. But they choose to call it MSfB, [3]. I note the Gov.UK website entry hasn’t been updated since March 2017 - which predates the 2018 name change. It is entirely possible that the school has notified the DfE and that it is the government website which is at fault, having not been updated to reflect the change of name. Either way, and irrespective of our personal views, which, in my case, is that the historic name should have been retained, I think we need to reflect the current, sourced, position. KJP1 (talk) 12:37, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

The government schools database is updated daily. The sources are in conflict. There is an official source and a self-referenced source. Fob.schools (talk) 12:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

First, perhaps lighten up a little? We're just two editors having a discussion, it's not Perry Mason. Second, while the GovUK website may make daily updates, it clearly states it hasn't updated this page [4] since 2017, which predates the name change. Third, there are multiple independent sources that reference the new name, such as [5], [6], [7], [8] and [9]. Of course many, the majority, don't as the original title's been used for four hundred and four years and the new title for two. But MSfB clearly is its name in 2020, and I think the page move to reflect that was the right call - even though I personally preferred the old title. KJP1 (talk) 21:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

The points in my previous contribution still stands. If the Monmouth School entry hasnt been updated since 2017, then that will be because the school hasn’t submitted any updates since then. Its down to the school to submit changes. If they cant be arsed doing so, thats their problem. Shows a distinct lack of respect I’d suggest. If you wish to provide alternative references to support the move, then thats great.Fob.schools (talk) 10:13, 4 December 2020 (UTC)