User talk:Gold heart

Hi Gold heart, Welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are a few helpful links to start you off: Avoiding common mistakes, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style, Policies and guidelines, Help, Merging pages.

If you need help or are curious about something, feel free to ask on my talk page or the village pump. You can sign your name and a date stamp on comments using four tildes (~~~~). If you have any further questions, feel free to ask, and I hope you enjoy being a Wikipedian! Andre (talk) 14:13, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I've completed your deletion nomination for this article. You can find the debate here. It's probably a good idea for you to edit the discussion and say why you think the article should be deleted. Tevildo 22:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Removing and reporting vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them again to the AIV noticeboard. Thanks. --Ginkgo100^talk 20:28, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great to see you weighing in to get the Republic of Ireland renamed!

))

PS , I think Nelson Mandela never said that stuff, more likely it was Marianne Williamson. Deepsoulstarfish 19:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tara Moon, Re your new idea for the NI article - yes much better! I would agree to that and can't see how anyone could object unless they are pushing a pov. Regards (Sarah777 00:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Marianne_Williamson says he never did, so there is another project for you :-) peace and best wishes Deepsoulstarfish 21:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Test sig.

"New Physiognomy, New York, 1866" ah ha! thanks for adding this info. The whole Race and intelligence "serise" needs a lot of work. I've been adding new material as fast as I can. some of the time some of the dates and titles for sources get mixed up. When I added this new section on Irish stereotypes you would not believe how this one editor responded [1] I felt like I was back in 1866 again for a moment! Thanks so much! futurebird 02:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Had not thought of that! Making note of progress and positive change might be a good idea. The topic has a narrow focus though. I was hard pressed enough to find sources that spoke about stereotypes about intelligence specifically (rather than stereotypes in general) New information and fresh eyes on this project are always needed and welcome. futurebird 03:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In you opinion RTE wound up the controversy ,i refer you too WP:NPOV and WP:Cite(Gnevin 21:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Taramoon,

The situation re: country/state etc. is really getting me down. Not so much for whatever outcome there will be but rather I am dismayed at how the matter is being discussed. It appears to me that certain editors are refusing to engage in discussion on the matter, but instead are carefully avoiding discussion and framing responses through misquotes and demanding that they do not need to explain such an obvious fact. Its disheartening in the extreme - and in the end, I believe, extremely dangerous to the future of the article.

As a clarifier, I do not dispute that Ireland could be called a county (in one sense of the word) (see here for an example), what I mean is that it is confusing to do so when Ireland-the-island is a country also (in another sense of the word) - meaning you have a country called Ireland in a country called Ireland. Its a copy edit conflict.

As for soverign state, see the UK for an example of a country also described here as one. This is how the state is described in the constitution. Article 5 (right after the name): "Ireland is a sovereign, independent, democratic state." [2]

--sony-youth^talk 23:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Tara. Did you mean not to make a vote for-or-against option 1 on the RoI page. As a heads up, I think its being recorded as a "no opinion" - if that's what you intended then good, but just in case it was not ... --sony-youth^talk 04:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing the 'citation needed' notice yourself. Can you now edit your edit summary and remove the personal attack from it, as clearly my removal of it was not for a 'false reason'? Please also see WP:AGF and WP:NPA. Bastun 11:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The citation notice is in the wrong position. I purposely didn't move it, someone else can do that. Gold heart 12:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I would like your opinion on the above short addition I made to Prehistoric settlement of Great Britain and Ireland. Cheers. Fergananim 14:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yayy!! Glad it's all sorted now :) Your new name is lovely - Alison^? 16:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you. And if you happen to pass this way again, it came down to a few choices. I picked it for a certain specific reason. And if you allow me to return the compliment, yours is a wonderful name. It is also much your credit that you would use your own real name on wikipedia. Thanks for checking the application over, maybe you should do bureaucrat, I think they are a bit short staffed up there. c u anon ;¬)) Gold_heart 17:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) And nooooo - adminship is already a ton of work!! I don't think I could hack being a 'crat - Alison^? 18:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure 'crat is a walk in the park in comparison, 'cause I see them doing Admin' work. - Gold_heart 20:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

memo -- Many Indian articles need going over for linking, grammar and spelling etc. Must try and do some on a regular basis, and give me a chance to learn more. Gold_heart 19:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Cheers! gaillimh^{Conas tá tú?} 02:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The vote was as part of a merge request - I'll admit I was pretty full on in pushing it through. The discussion took place across the Full breakfast (the new page) and the Full English breakfast talk page. There wasn't so much discussion on the Irish breakfast page. Most of the important stuff is on the Full breakfast page. Personally, I don't feel any degree of sadness to see it go, but rather more satisfied that a common name could be arrived at (England-based editors were the most fervently opposed). I merged the two texts myself and can testify that what little differences there was between the two could be kept in the combined article as it just as equally applied to the other. The new situation also gives equal respect to Scottish and Welsh breakfasts which had previously redirected to English breakfast. Ar aon nós, nice to see ya back. Good luck with the piano program, I'm an interaction designer myself so I know how painfully slow it is to finish things. Post a link to my user page when you're done, I'd like to check it out. --sony-youth^talk 19:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Eadgbe.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BigrTex 21:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to the upload log, you uploaded an image by that name on June 7, 2006. It appears to be a 50x50 white jpg. It was somewhat confusing to me as well. It was uploaded over what appears to be a picture of someone non-notable which was added to Irish People the day before your upload. If you have no strong feelings about these images, then don't worry about it and the closing admin at WP:IfD will take care of it. ~ BigrTex 20:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Bloomsday now points to Bloomsday (disambiguation), which now has 5 alternatives (the Irish holiday, the race, two music bands, and a cartoon episode). Before anyone changes Bloomsday to mean the holiday: how notable outside Ireland is the holiday compared to the other alternatives? I live in England and I have never heard of the Bloomsday holiday. Anthony Appleyard 12:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re this comment - why not try Firefox, things like spell checking come as standard... /wangi 22:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LO2U, well flicking about on WP I hit upon your user-page. Some very good thoughts there about WP etc and IP editors. I didn't notice anything wrong with your spelling, and it appears spot-on to me. Just to let you know that there is a great little resource that one can add to their browser. You can get it at http://www.iespell.com/ -Gold?heart 21:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, that's because I get very emabarrassed if I make mistakes - had to look up "exaggerate" several times during that article discussion :-). Thanks for the link - I'll take a look tomorrow. BTW - I'm very pleased that article's (hopefully) sorted out. --Lo2u ^{(T • C)} 22:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gold?heart. I really am sorry to read your talk page comment. I like to assume good faith but I know I don't always - I certainly never meant to attack you personally or to belittle what you were saying - my comment about people not liking the term wasn't meant to pick up Bastun's comment and the wording was poorly concidered - it was meant more of an attempt to pre-empt the inevitable "why the Irish don't like the British" comments - which you've had no part in but which fill large parts of the page. That page has as many opinions as editors but I do appreciate your attempts to reconcile us all. All the best. --Lo2u ^{(T • C)} 01:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. I wasn't sure if you were addressing me but I felt my immediate repitition of words that were slightly belittling couldn't have been very nice for you. Bastun, in his defence, has previously been accused of personal attacks that he simply hasn't been guilty of - and he's probably feeling singled out and is afraid the article will go in a direction he feels would be a big mistake if he doesn't respond to talk page comments. If he's sharp at times I don't think he's assuming bad faith. I rather think I need a break from this too - this is one of these bad experiences where it's good to stand back and realise the thing doesn't really matter at all. Take care.--Lo2u ^{(T • C)} 01:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the diff out of the AfD, but solely as out of past respect and current conciliatoriness. It was relevant and ought to have been seen as it succinctly explained the reasons for the "new article" - plain, simple, ugly sectarianism. --sony-youth^pléigh 18:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put the link to the diff back in after reading your comments on the AfD page. I am appalled at this disruption and ashamed that I may, through our shared opinion, be associated it. --sony-youth^pléigh 19:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you'll look back and say that it was the Brits that divided us. There were four Irish editors on that page, now there are two and two. --sony-youth^pléigh 19:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gold heart. Just making a reply to your following comment on the United Ireland talk-page.

Ireland was united in 1014 a.d. by Brian Boru, high king of Ireland.FACT.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Suikoeire (talk • contribs)

And it had a unified monarchy, High-Kingship, for centuries before that. Gold?heart 18:45, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly for both himself and the Dal gCais, Brian achieved nothing of the sort. He directly controlled Thomond, was King of Munster, was allied with Hy-Many and Mide, but could never bring Aileach, Ulster or Leinster fully under his control. And that's not even to mention the kingdoms of Dublin, Waterford and Wexford.

Nor was the monarcy unified - its claimants and holders were from different dynasties all over the island - or in use for centuries before that. It only came into existence in the 9th century (circa 862, just over a century and a half before Clontarf. And I must point out - again - that none of the Ard Rí's from Aed Finlaith (reigned 862-876) to Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair (1166-1198) EVER ruled all Ireland. Their title simply meant that they were the most powerful king on an island of kings.

The wiki section on High King of Ireland sums it up: The concept of a high kingship was converted into political reality by the Uí Néill in 862 when Aed Finliath is styled in the annals as rí Érenn uile (king of all Ireland), but this was a personal kingship (my emphasis - Fergananim) to be won anew generation by generation rather than an impersonal office settled upon a lineage.

Am sorry to hear you are leaving us, especally as I have never made the pleasure of your acquaintence, but I understand something of your reasons for doing so. Is mise le meas mor, Fergananim 19:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gold - I revert your redirect; when we talk of these islands here people refer to Britain and Ireland rather than "Great Britain and Ireland". I'm trying to name the article after the most common usage in Ireland; the most Geographically correct would be "British Islands and Ireland" - but I've never heard or read that used! (Sarah777 00:46, 30 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Gold, over the top, I may have been, but not without reason. I am on your side regarding problems with the articles, but I do not think that the winning approach it to beat them editors editors over the head with the name issue. It is the last thing that they will give in on, and the least thing that we can prove in a unequivocally. It is counter productive because pulls the talk page into acrimony; then they close ranks and react just as we would: viscously, ardently, and unmovable. Everything edit we make and every change we propose gets tainted with suspicion that its some ploy to against the name. They will see a Popish Plot everywhere.

We are enormously out numbered. Brute force will not win. We have to box clever. Win some of them over, then pull the carpet out from under those who remain. Look at the changes I made to the article recently: adding the languages section, adding the political cooperation section, adding the names in other languages. They wanted the reference to the dispute removed from the first sentence? Fine, no problem, I'll move it to the end of the paragraph - and expand it to three while removing references to the UK in the lede. Changes like these chip away at the monolithic British (read anglo-centric) interpretation of the islands - but we cannot hit them head on: the movement must be from below. --sony-youth^pléigh 16:27, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sony, it's not "them and us" - we all have the same aim - improving Wikipedia and ensuring that articles are written from a neutral point of view. Your comments above indicate that you are assuming that other editors are acting in bad faith or have some hidden agenda or prejudice. Wikipedia is a collaboration, not a war; we don't need editors to act as moles or sleeper agents. Such behaviour is not in keeping with the collaborative nature of the project. Waggers 09:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Waggers, that wasn't my intention - but I can see how it would be read as such. That there is undoubtedly an opinion that there is a "them and us" attitude towards the BI page, see conversations between Gold and Sarah across their talk pages as evidience. My intention above was to demonstrate a partisan editor the rationale and, especially, benefit of WP:CIVIL, WP:ATTACK and WP:NPOV - to work with people rather than constantly beat them over the head with the same issue. But, I none the less accept your criticism and my comments above were badly thought out. --sony-youth^pléigh 09:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a relief, sorry that I misunderstood you. You've always come across as a level-headed editor and I think you set a very good example, so I was quite surprised! I'm glad it was a misunderstanding. Waggers 09:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS. Sorry Gold heart, we seem to have hijacked your user talk page! Waggers 09:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(reduce indent) No apologies needed. I am afraid that I have been misunderstood this last week or so. Can I set out a challenge to any editor to make a link to this page to anything written that shows that I have not assumed good faith, or have breached anything civil. That being said I have been personally attacked by Bastun (an Irish editor), he really adds very little in the way of opinion to the page and lurks about in the hope of making some odious comment or other, this doesn't help the page. My exchange with Sony-youth was to the point an addressed the issues, and was in my belief, not personal. So Waggers, if you think it's a them and us affair with some, you will find that I have praised the British editors, and one of my favourite editors is Tharkumcoll, how's that! Also I didn't know anything about the "new page" until 2 hours after it was made, there was nothing that I could do about it, no more than any other editor. And BTW, the reference to "tiny people" had nothing to do with the BI talk page, it was written as a conciliatory piece, and I am extremely anti-isolationist in my WP attitudes. I could go on, but the challenge is there, and I will be able to answer it, no doubt. Gold? 12:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Challenge accepted. Let's start with this edit. We have a user (me) accused of personally attacking you, "lurking" about in the hope of breaching WP:NPA, with "odious" comments, etc.

I have made (to the best of my recollection and a quick search) one previous edit to this page - back on 26th February (no. 8 above), where I asked you to retract an attack on me on the Croke Park article. This edit, bizarrely singling me out, is a breach of WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA and WP:AGF. An apology is in order. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 12:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Bastun, I have a right to say so, because you did attack me, and I have the right to respond and defend. Gold? 12:19, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where?! Please either supply a diff or have the good grace to apologise and retract. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 12:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it to the British Isles pages for the moment and please do not try change the issues here. I'll address that other issue separately, later. Gold? 12:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. I'm not changing the issues here. You are the one who issued your challenge, after all, and I'm responding to it here. Again, prove your allegation or withdraw it and apologise. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 13:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bastun, what response? Keep it in the framework of this last week in relation to the BI pages. Gold? 13:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You said (above, on this page): "Can I set out a challenge to any editor to make a link to this page to anything written that shows that I have not assumed good faith, or have breached anything civil."

I pointed out that in that post itself you were breaching WP:NPA WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL, by accusing me of:

• making personal attacks against you,
• denigrated my contributions, and
• lurking about "in the hope of making some odious comment or other".

And I have asked you (several times now) to either back up your claim with evidence or to retract and apologise.

Even if you are talking about the 'British Isles' talk page, rather than this page, I:

• responded to your "Cormac Mac Airt = King Arthur" comment, asking for sources;
• clarified who I was accusing of trolling (not you);
• made a (valid) point in repsonse to you that googling "map of Europe" and counting the non-appearances of "British Isles" wasn't exactly scientific;
• answered your question about who uses the term West Indies;
• told you not to edit out my comments;
• and supplied a possible reason for the discrepancy in google hits.

I'm still not seeing any personal attack...

Again - supply a diff where I attacked you; or retract and apologise. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 14:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bastun, this is somewhat tiresome. I retain my right to respond to personal attacks, and I also retain my right to defend myself from personal attacks. I have other more pressing things to be doing today rather than responding to you with ditto, ditto, ditto. Gold? 14:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're perfectly entitled to respond to and defend yourself from personal attacks. That's not an issue. Thing is, I have the same rights. You've asserted that I have attacked you. I have demonstrated that I haven't. That's actually twice now you've personally attacked me (including your edit summary on Croke Park). So - any chance of an apology? Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 14:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bastun: # clarified who I was accusing of trolling (not you);. Indeed Bastun, that was me on that occasion. And I'm still waiting for your apology/retraction; but I'm not stalking your talk page like a bully trying to force it out of you. Please cease this harassment of GoldHeart. (Sarah777 15:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Defending my good name is now stalking? Asking for evidence or a retraction is now bullying? Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 15:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bastun, I am willing to forgive and forget. In edit summaries, it's not usual to cite a user_name and their talk page. That type of editing is usually reserved as an answer to vandalism. You did that in Croke Park to one of my edits. You had the citation in the wrong place, and I mistakenly made a good-faith edit. There were some exchange afterward that was a bit iffy. But I thought no more about it until you personally attacked me at the BI talk page, and it was then I remembered the earlier incident. I have to be at the Shelbourne Hotel at 5.30 pm and will not be around for some hours. Gold? 15:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re Croke Park. I'm not bothered about it - just to note that if one clicks the 'Undo' button, the edit summary automatically contains the previous editor's username/talkpage link. I rarely remove that and generally just add in my own edit summary afterwards.

Re British Isles. You've now again accused me of attacking you there. I went through the page using Ctrl + F to find my edits and I've listed all my edits from the current talk page that involve you in any way, above. Unless I'm really missing something - none of those is a personal attack. Yes, I accused Sarah of being a troll. Not you. I may have sailed close to the mark in response to an anti-Irish comment from TharkunColl. That's it. No personal attack directed at you. Yet you keep accusing me of making one. I don't think I'm out of line in asking for you to supply the diffs in question; or in seeking an apology if you can't do so.

Anyway - enjoy the Shelbourne Hotel. How much are they charging for a pint in the Horseshoe Bar these days? Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 15:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bastun; that Ctrl+F is great! But really, as an (admittedly not totally neutral) observer you seem to be hounding Gold, probably in contravention of WP:HOUND. And Gold manifestly wants this discussion to cease. (Sarah777 16:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Bastun, I am not bothered about Croke Park either, it's in the distant past as far as I'm concerned. I said earlier that I had forgot about it, as far as I'm concerned, it is over. Still no editor has met my challenge, as outlined above. Gold? 01:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gold, just to clarify - my mentioning of a "them and us" attitude was a response to what sony-youth wrote at the top of this thread, not to any action of yours. Meanwhile I'd suggest to any other readers reading this that the challenge remains unmet - squabbling among ourselves is not going to improve the encyclopaedia nor any of our relationships. Waggers 08:25, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, re-reading the challenge, I'm now unsure as to whether you mean this page, or the BI talk page. Regardless, I don't recall any uncivility or personal attacks made by you on either page - with the exception of your repeated accusations that I have attacked you. On further reading of WP:NPA, accusing someone of making a personal attack is in itself not a personal attack. I therefore withdraw my accusations that you have personally attacked me, and I apologise. However, the fact remains that you have, several times, accused me of attacking you. I can't find any evidence of it, and despite repeated requests, you have failed to provide any. So - how about withdrawing the remarks, call it a scoreless draw, and we can move on, get Friday out of the way and enjoy a stress-free bank holiday weekend? Regards, Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 10:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Bastun, thanks for some of your comments. I really don't like accusing anyone of directing a personal attack against me. You have asked me for the link, and to be honest I had some difficulty tracing, and also I was busy at other things too. In a court of law, it's most often in the way a transgression is interpreted by the recipient that is accepted by the court as being fact. So if the recipient has been hurt by some remark, the court won't deem on whether the recipient should, or should not have been hurt by a remark (slander). Basically, the way I took this remarkis as follows. You addressed me, and you pointed to a WP link that was all about "hate". The inference was that I hated the term "British Isles", or maybe I hated the term British. This could, in the circumstance be inferred that I harboured "racial hatred". Well Bastun, that's very far from the truth. Sometimes these disputes get into the area of hyperbola, and maybe the odd "point" is pressed a little too strong, but Bastun, it's not hatred, it's just debate. It's important that one can argue, with fervour sometimes, without being tarred with the above, and it's not a nice accusation to take, especially when it's incorrect. Gold? 01:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's an... interesting... chain of assumptions. To be clear, my intention was only to point out that an editor can't remove something because they don't like it. And I linked to the relevant essay. It was never my intention to accuse you of racial hatred. If that's the inference you took, then apologies for any offence caused. In my defence, though, I don't think linking to WP rules, guideline or essays is generally frowned upon. Regards, Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 23:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I sometimes frown upon it - it can often be a breach of WP:CIVIL, implying things about another editor based, in certain cases, on flawed reasoning. (Sarah777 23:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I am afraid Bastun that it was you who made the "interesting... chain of assumptions" - I didn't assume anything about you, nor did I question your motives for being on the British Isles (BI) page, nor would I tell you how or what to think, or believe for that matter. That's your personal business. The paragraph you pointed to, without going into detail, did not represent me, or my beliefs, at all. Neither did it represent anything I had said. It can be uncivil to make an assumption about another editor, it's always better to keep the subject, and not to make the other editors the subject. You said, "To be clear, my intention was only to point out that an editor can't remove something because they don't like it". Who told you that I don't like the term BI? Who said that I wanted to remove the article BI from WP? Also, the content of your direction was about hatred. The situation is, that because you pointed to that paragraph, those words became yours, including the "hatred" word. It was not a "relevant essay", it was totally uncalled for, and totally irrelevant. Quote, "I don't think linking to WP rules, guideline or essays is generally frowned upon". Bastun, it's not a WP rule you pointed to, as you said, it's an essay, and I believe that it is an essay that should be rewritten. What rules did I break Bastun? It was totally uncalled for, and I hope you see clearly, my points. Neither do I harbour grudges, I wan't to move on from here, and thanks for kinder words earlier, but it is important that you understand the points I have made here today. Gold? 01:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Point taken, and again, apologies. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 10:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That looks great Gold - much better! Mind, the Bank of Ireland is no more but the photo is a great record of what the crossroads once looked like. (Sarah777 10:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Gold - there IS actually a Luas stop to be built at Laughanstown rather than Loughlinstown [3], believe it or not! Regards (Sarah777 21:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Neither had I till the Luas came around...I assumed it was a mistake too. (Sarah777 21:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Hanged irish piper.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shankill, Dublin Article

Council housing is not exclusively a UK term. You and your fangirl/boy/droid Sarah777 seem to think it is, when even Dublin City Council (Dublin Corporation) seem to have no problem with it, and use it currently.

From CH article.

"The Republic of Ireland has a similar public housing system, Local Authority Accommodation."

This is going into the Shankill article upon the next inevitable revert. Remove it and you're simply being a troll for the sake of it. Stop pushing your middle class guilt into articles where it has no place, it's tedious and really is beneath such great editors such as yourself and Sarah777.

Shankill, Dublin Article

Council housing is not exclusively a UK term. You and your fangirl/boy/droid Sarah777 seem to think it is, when even Dublin City Council (Dublin Corporation) seem to have no problem with it, and use it currently.

From CH article.

"The Republic of Ireland has a similar public housing system, Local Authority Accommodation."

This is going into the Shankill article upon the next inevitable revert. Remove it and you're simply being a troll for the sake of it. Stop pushing your middle class guilt into articles where it has no place, it's tedious and really is beneath such great editors such as yourself and Sarah777.

You did link it to council house in the UK, which, may I suggest, wasn't a correct link. Why are you so tied up over that sentence. I reckon that you are pretty "middle class", for it seems a very MC edit, may be wrong, and that's a guess. A house, is a house, is a house. Gold? 12:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, gold star, I think you'll find there are several different types of houses. Just ask Sarah777. Sentence changed to proper, acceptable PC term, as worked out tediously by this IP and Sarah777. Please keep your POV opinions about me out of Wikipedia.

Oh come on anonymous person! Given the abuse you are hurling at me in the Shankill talkpage you are a bit chutzpahtic to attack Gold for POV. "Please keep your POV opinions about me out of Wikipedia." Why not try signing your trolling like the rest of us? (Sarah777 02:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Gold, thank you very much for your comment at Elinor's RfA! I've never had someone say, "Okay. I'll strike it, and all because of --Iamunknown, for I know from some past experience that he/she is a good and worthy editor, and I'll defer on this occasion." That really brightened my day.  :-) I hope you like this sunflower and I hope that it will brighten your day too! --Iamunknown 04:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:Signature, could you please take the smiley face from your signature? Thanks. Miranda 04:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done! And thanks for pointing that page out to me, I was going change it back anyway, it was a bit distracting. Gold? 12:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Miranda 16:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have finally decided to leave Wikipedia, and I depart with sadness. I have fallen in love with someone, and there is a tricky situation involved. And from now I have to pursue other interests, and maybe find a way through. Everyone, thanks for the laughs, and if I ever crossed anyone, maybe it was because I liked you too. I think I have done some fairly good edits, but my academic memory has faded, and no, I'm not too old, and still turn the odd head.

So if you come here to the page over some former edit, or such, I'll probably have left the building at that stage. Good editing, and shalom, and the in the loveliest of all languages Slainte. Gold? 20:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And there was I just getting to know you! All the best in your life; hope it works out (Sarah777 20:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Aw - sad to see you go. Take care and I hope everything works out. Slán leat! Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 07:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sad to see you go too Gold. Best fortune where ever love takes you. Whatever about my hard words two weeks ago - I'll miss you around. Slán leat! --sony-youth^pléigh 22:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just dropping by, thanks for the kind words. Everything is going in a circle of work, to wikipedia, and then for libations. Just have to break the cycle, and get out of the loop for a while. Some pressing issues to sort. May come back after a break for a couple of months, see how things move. Thanks Gold? 12:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

quote:

"Interesting, my friend works for NTL broadband, and often has to track addresses for a certain state agency. I was very tempted to show her this page earlier on. But I didn't. IP, we are watching you! Your IP is public is in the public domain! Gold? 00:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)"[reply]

- What exactly did you plan to do with this illegally obtained, confidential customer information? Did you plan on posting the IP's lease owner name and address here? Surely that would contravene, oh I don't know, several laws?

Hey, it was only a wind up joke, just like I was wound up by the IP. Cheers ;) Gold? 20:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gold heart, sorry for the long-delayed reply. People tend to get uppity when they see images in signatures - and when a million other things happen. BTW, if you want to short your signature further, you can change the code to Gold? ([[User:Gold heart|<span style="color: #0B0; font-family: Bradley Hand ITC; font-size: +2;">Gold?</span>]]). It renders the same for me yet is a bit shorter.

And I hope that your absence is not permanent! Come back when you feel ready, and help make an encyclopedia.  :) Cheers, Iamunknown 14:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks;) Gold? 20:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi gold! Welcome back. Don't apologise to offensive trolls...your only crime was to express a bit of concern for me. That obviously annoyed some agendistas. Cheers (Sarah777 20:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

And if you hit this page, "You are once, twice, three times a lady,". Thanks! Gold? 21:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Review notes on Medieval Irish History, re Cronin. Attend to library, book overdue. Gold? 13:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reading your comments just now on the RfC, I have to say, I'm genuinely puzzled how you can just overlook the many fine examples of incivility at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Sarah777#Evidence_of_disputed_behavior. When you say you have always found her "refreshing, to the point, and always civil", are you by any chance regarding blatant Anglophobia and hostility bordering on racism as not a case of incivility? I think that has to be the case doesn't it? Just asking, as it's a shame to see the "pro-Irish-cause" editors apparently lining up behind ignoring this, as it undermines standards on Wikipedia. MarkThomas 13:29, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, talk about Anglophobia and racism, what should we call this [[4]]?:). I only go by my experience on WP, and that's mine. No point pretending that the past was all rosey an sweet. If someone says otherwise, well? Maybe it's time for stepping back. Gold? 13:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see the ground we're actually on - pure POV campaigning. Did you also see that programme produced by RTE where they showed how the Dublin government allowed a number of leading SS exterminators to live quietly in the suburbs of Dublin after the war? It was on the History Channel last night in the UK. Still, a few facts aren't going to trouble you are they. MarkThomas 13:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I don't watch television, not since about three years ago, so I missed that one. People who had done terrible deeds during WW2 lived in Britain too, and were never charged. So really, it not unique, and shouldn't be used in debate. It was often years later that the evidence surfaced, and I totally abhor what did happen during WW2, and other wars. Gold? 14:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By "terrible deeds", who exactly do you mean? Winston Churchill perhaps? MarkThomas 18:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mark, war is bad, bad, bad. It represents utter failure of mankind. I have an aunt and an uncle who fought in WW2, and another uncle-in-law was a major and secretary to field-marshal Montgomery, and he even wrote a book. Yeah I know a bit about war. Are you trying to "pull my chain"? Gold? 19:16, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Goldheart! Nice to see you back on. To answer, I always use {{Reflist}} instead of references-small, for a number of reasons. 1) it's tidier, 2) It's clearer to newbie editors that follow along that "this is where the references end up" 3) you can make it 2-columns later with a simple |2 option. Also, as its not transcluded, we can make global changes to how small reference lists work with one file change. It's all good :). Furthermore, {{sourcesstart}} and {{sourcesend}} complement it perfectly when adding footnotes and cites that are not embedded references. Check them out! - Alison ? 22:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Allie, that's interesting as I'm half-baked in a couple of languages. I like the global use. Always wondered about that;- Gold? 22:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop attacking other editors per Talk:Great_Irish_Famine#Genocide. Next time you will be blocked. Tyrenius 20:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tyrenius - can you provide some diffs here, please? I'm not seeing repeated instances of personal attacks there - Alison ? 20:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rest it a day, ta ;) Gold? 21:29, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tyrenius, left message on your page. Thanks Tyrenius for being vigilant and impartial, leave it there;) Gold? 20:42, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you are doing well! I'll comment at WT:BP later today; I got on Wikipedia for a short while to see if anything rash had happened ;) and what I saw was that none had! Now I'm off to real life and such. Later, Iamunknown 14:29, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a short sojourn, will be away for a day or two. Gold? 18:24, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Good luck! Enjoy the break ... :) - Alison ? 19:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • Hurray, you are back! (I peeked on Allie's talk page :P) --Iamunknown 05:21, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Agus fáilte romhat ar ais - Alison ? 06:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your page moves at the speed of fork lightning, just made it, we'll have to make you a bureaucrat so you can slow down. I hope you have a nice time in Ireland, "Singing in the Rain" maybe;) Thanks for the explano, cheers. Gold? 13:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Squeak is at it again, off for a nap. Gold? 00:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you're having a difficult time. Please stay strong! I wish I could cheer you up in person; but since that's not a possibility, e-mail me if you need to (plz!). I don't want you to leave. In hopes to cheer you up, if only for a little while, I leave you these flowers and a splash of colour! Again, please e-mail me if you need to! --Iamunknown 23:52, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And one from me. Take care, come back soon. we need you. (Sarah777 09:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I noticed your reply. Thanks :) Could you enable your e-mail? Just go to Special:Preferences, add in your e-mail address and click "Enable e-mail from other users". Sarah and I miss you! (Alison would too, but she's out of town! :P) --Iamunknown 01:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... hope everything is okay with you. Please do return here - you'll always be welcome and your friends here miss you. Your friend, Allie. - Alison ? 10:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Thursday night it was, not feeling great inside, but surface okay, engaged in a marathon Hold'Em Poker session, lots of drinks being passed around, lost my shirt, didn't feel too good at the end, can't really drink more than four, it doesn't agree, thanks for concern, it means a lot. Much better now, hope I haven't lost my credibility as well as my shirt :) Gold? 17:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heck no Gold! Welcome back!!(Sarah777 21:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Hmmmmm. OK, so maybe flowers weren't the right gesture! (Sarah777 01:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

LOL, always liked flowers! Gold 11:10, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like someone finally caught on! --Iamunknown 17:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This edit, which you removed without good cause, was not a personal attack and I do not appreciate you accusing me of something I have not done in a discussion you were not involved in.--Jackyd101 21:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am perfectly cool and if you had looked slightly higher in the discussion you would have seen a series of worse comments made against me by other users which I was perfectly happy to ignore (hence my note that it was said to me above). By over reacting in this manner you are inflaming rather than diffusing a situation.--Jackyd101 21:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Ihad been perfectly civil and encouraging others to compromise - until attakced me for no reason.--Vintagekits 21:57, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jackyd101. No one is claiming to be "in charge" of anything. Could be taken as provocative. Just try to keep things cool. Discuss the issues and not the other editors. Thanks. GH 22:02, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GH, no one could say that I was being uncivil up to that point infact if you see here I requested others to listen to what Jack had said and to come to a compromise.--Vintagekits 22:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vk, I didn't say you were. I noticed Rocket only deleted what he "wanted to", so I thought to do the other.GH 22:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I accept what you have said but I had, just shortly before, been subject to edits like this from another editor, which passed without comment. Vintagekits was being somewhat reasonable up until this point, but in this edit he insisted that either his opinion was followed or noones would (which is what I replied to) and in this edit he really began to change tune. I apologise for any offense caused, but I feel removing my comment in this instance was unwarranted.--Jackyd101 22:10, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was getting overheated, just trying to cool, and it's not simplistic.That last quote was to Rockpocket, I think, and there was an obvious reason. And I can see multi-dimensions here. GH 22:15, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, GH, considering some of the language further up in the discussion, I didn't see Jack's comment as a personal attack, which is why I never removed it. Jack's question was pointed, certainly but no more so the "Havent you disgraced yourself enough today?" from Vk further up, and I note you never removed that. Horses for courses, eh? Still, there is little to be gained by playing a game of "who started it". Lets all calm down and get back on track, shall we. Rockpocket 22:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See it cuts both ways. Why didn't you remove all. Agree with you about cool. GH 22:25, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For what its worth I apologies for my comment, although I did not directly use directly abusive language in an attempt (in a small way) to inject some humour, however I was seriously pissed off with Jacks comment before that. Anyway lets get on with the DISCUSSION.--Vintagekits 22:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GH. Just a quick note to say thanks for you message on my talk page. The Manual of Style has a lot in it and my eyes tend to glaze over if I get too deep in it but it does still have some valuable tools for editing around here. Also be aware that things in it change from time to time, though usually only after much discussion. Thanks again and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 12:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My currency work is going automatic from this week, (yes those darn computers again!), and I may not have to spend so much time on the internet as before. But will hop in from time to time to see how I'm doing. See-ya around! GH 13:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that but it has been reverted again, and the edits of 5 Users have been removed. I have reported it on the 3rr but thats all I'm in a position to do. You may what to look at my talk page. --Domer48 14:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gold heart , First of there is no agreement not to edit the article, there was a request. [5], and a proposal [6], both without agreement. Now you have editors claiming there was an agreement, [7]. Now there was an edit made by a new user, who is supposed to be me, and what these editors what is that no editor can go near this article, not just me. Five editors have contributed to this article since the revert, and in their blind ignorance they have reverted there edits. They just want the article locked! That’s is it! I’ve reported it left right and centre and nothing [8], [9], and all the admins in the AbrCom. Having to put up with this [10]? That brings you up to here --Domer48 17:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gold heart My advice leave well enough alone, save your sanity. These editors can not come up with any referenced information to challenge my edits so they resort to having the page locked. If you become involved, they will direct their attention on you. Unless an admin decides to confront this it will persist. I have all my information saved, and it will go into that article, they will have to get of their arses and do some research if they want to change it. Trust me save yourself! Take care, Regards --Domer48 17:16, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gold I back up everything I do with references, I can source all my edits, with multiple authors and publications. For every source I use I can provide three additional one's if I wish. All I get in return is name calling, opinion (considered to be better than a reference by some) and not a referenced quote between them. Any ideas? --Domer48 18:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dormer48, I have noticed some of that all right, I remember that. When these issues get protracted, that's where I lose the plot. Sometimes when it goes to talk, some of the editors get involved in equivocation and "red herring syndrome", and it just goes on. Keep the referenced and notes on the talk page, it would be a good benchmark to go back to. GH 18:30, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They say they want balance, and that I’m pushing a POV, surly the way to stop me in my tracks is to provide references which counteract what I’m saying? But they will not, no its much easer to call me names. You reverted the article, did you see the amount of referenced information I put in there. Did you see the citation tags I added? And what do they go for, the referenced stuff? Gold, honestly, any Ideas? --Domer48 18:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gold, listen thanks for earlier, a friendly word and what have you. It dose help, and is very much appreciated.I have just about had enough of this. If your around Dublin at all drop me an email! Can show you some great book shops! Thanks again, Regards --Domer48 20:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Dormer48, rarely get into Dublin unless it's something pressing, hate the traffic, but not too far out. I won't be as much on WP into the future as can be seen in edit above under currencies. I'll see how things go for the next few weeks, no doubt I'll be in and out of some of pages again. GH 21:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning linking to Irish Potato Famine
Maritimes, Crochet, History of London, President of Ireland, Robert Peel, Typhus, Monoculture, Limerick, Toronto, Phytopathology, Dublin statues and their nicknames , Miramichi, New Brunswick, Eliza Lynch, Highland Clearances, William Edward Forster, Sustainable agriculture, List of Irish ballads, Ashton-under-Lyne, Hercules Robinson, 1st Baron Rosmead, John Millington Synge, Genetic diversity, Trinity (novel), History of Birmingham, Phytophthora, Michael Nolan, Baron Nolan, Disease management (agriculture), Black 47, List of people who died of starvation , List of wars and disasters by death toll , William Parsons, 3rd Earl of Rosse, Knights of Father Mathew , Irish American , History of Limerick, ist of natural disasters in the United Kingdom, Irish Quebecers, Cappamore, Americanism (heresy), Religion in the United Kingdom, James Hack Tuke, Government 1846-1852, John Boyle O'Reilly, Irish Land Acts, Irish Hunger Memorial, Agricultural extension, History of Ireland (1801–1922), Knock Shrine, List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom, History of Toronto, History of Ann Arbor, Michigan, Broadstone, Leviathan of Parsonstown, Celtic fusion, Joseph Henry Blake, The Brookline-Boston Annexation Issue of 1873, Denis Donaldson, History of Cork, Scottish east coast fishery, Roman Catholicism in Great Britain, Catholic Church in England and Wales, Northern Irish murals, Celtic F.C. Songs, Saint Brigid's Roman Catholic Church, New York, The Holy Name of Jesus, Manchester, Charles-Félix Cazeau, Freddie Lennon, Revolutions of 1848, Scottish Canadian , Robert Bowne Minturn , Mountmellick embroidery,
GH 13:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• You're doing some excellent work here - well done! Some of us have noticed :) - Alison ☺ 00:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks! Much more than I thought there was. Just discovered another 100 ;) GH 00:08, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

||New Brunswick||, ||Trick-or-treating||, ||History of the United Kingdom||, ||1848||, ||1849||, ||The Times||, ||Biodiversity||, ||Victoria of the United Kingdom||, ||County Leitrim||, ||Saint Patrick's Battalion||, ||Institute for Historical Review||, ||Quaker Tapestry||, ||Corn Laws||, ||Five Points, Manhattan||, ||Colchester, Illinois||, ||Ireland||, ||Absentee landlord||, ||Irish farm subdivision||, ||Folly||, ||Seamus Metress||, ||John Mitchel||, ||The Nation (Irish newspaper)||, ||Irish potato famine (legacy)||, ||Helen Hayes||, ||Isaac Butt||, ||Poor Law||, ||History of Cape Colony from 1806 to 1870||, ||Anne Sullivan||, ||The Diocese of Meath||, ||History of the United States (1865–1918)||, ||John William McCormack||, ||Edward Everett||, ||History of New York City||, ||Irish nationalism||, ||Giffen good||, ||Bohermeen||, ||Timothy Anglin||, ||Oregon boundary dispute||, ||Lough Erne||, ||Irish community in Britain||, ||Timeline of Ontario history||, ||Kells, County Meath||, ||Merry Gentry||, ||Columbian Exchange||, ||Translations||, ||History of the British Isles||, ||IPF||, ||Virginia, County Cavan||, ||Carrick-on-Suir||, ||James FitzGerald||, ||Northern Counties Committee||, ||River Nore||, ||International Financial Services Centre||, ||Elihu Burritt||, ||Irish immigration to Puerto Rico||, ||Kathleen Ni Houlihan||, ||Ballinrobe||, ||Miramichi Valley||, ||Black Irish||, ||Daniel O'Donnell (Irish singer)||, ||Irish clans||, ||Glenarm||, ||Dermot Mulroney||, ||Kildorrery||, ||McCunn||, ||Douglas Labalmondière||, ||United States House elections, 1854||, ||John East||, ||Francis Kelly||, ||Michael Corcoran||, ||Cleator Moor||, ||Manions of America||, ||History of Wyandotte, Michigan||, ||Thomas Redington||, ||Mary Balfour Herbert||, ||List of environment topics:G||, ||Immigration to Canada||, ||Royal Decree of Graces of 1815||, ||The Hands That Built America||, ||Catholicism and American politics||, ||Old Immigrants||, ||Biodiversity and food||, ||Limerick railway station||, ||Liverpool Irish||, ||History of New Brunswick||, ||Irish Coercion Bill||, ||List of History Bites episodes||, ||History of Lowell, Massachusetts||, ||History of the Irish language||, ||The Lough Gowna Valley||, ||1845 in Ireland||, ||The Irish Famine (book)||, ||Revolutions of 1848||, ||Irish potato candy||, ||John Hutchinson (industrialist)||, ||1845 in the United Kingdom||, ||1847 in the United Kingdom||, ||1849 in the United Kingdom||, ||100 Biggest Weather Moments||, ||Maguire, Ontario|||br>GH 03:13, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• <curious>Oh my! What is all of this?</curious> --Iamunknown 03:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Links that need correcting - User:Sarah777 took it upon herself to copy/paste-create Great Irish Famine during a debate at Irish Potato Famine over where the article should live, instead of waiting for the outcome of the debate and doing a 'Move' if that was the consensus. Result: many broken links. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 09:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the discussion at AN, I am replying to this comment here because I believe the discussion is no longer germane to that section.

I disagree with your interpretation. If you are so upset at the use of such language, why on earth did you respond using the exact same sort of caricature? You can't have it both ways, either you are tremendously offended by the use those sort of adjectives or you are not; but retrospectively pillorying me for writing something when you responded in kind immediately afterwards is disengenuous, to say the least.

I have little more to discuss with you on this issue. If you wish to take it further then do so in the appropriate forum. As always, I welcome the opportunity for the community to comment on my administrative decisions. I am happy to co-operate with any RfC and will abide by any consensus that should form. Rockpocket 00:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am human too. I do know some of my compatriots who have fiery tempers, and I also know some British who have fiery tempers. And I know some continental people who have fiery tempers. I did state that I knew a range of British people from cool to fiery. I didn't class all British with a caricature. Also, it shows my shock and horror at the time. GH 00:49, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you hope to achieve by forum shopping with your allegations, but its not going to work. I have already explained the reason I used that comment, I have apologised for the offense it may have caused (twice). Four or five other admins commented in that thread without concern and others still have offered praise for the manner in which I handled the Vk saga. I have told you numerous times the correct way to proceed if you have a concern over my administrative actions, and I have offered to co-operate fully. That is the only way you are going to get any results.

If you continue to make unfounded allegations against me ("I have challenged Rockpocket on some of his racist remarks," implies there are more that remain unchallenged. Prove that or reword, please) then you will find youself the subject of a request for action. Open an RfC or move on, its time to put up or shut up. Rockpocket 01:03, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Totally founded, by not withdrawing you have compounded the action. The tread is in black and white. Other editors can make their own judgement. GH 01:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On a technical note, how does one go about withdrawing something that has already been deleted? If you can tell me how, I'll be happy to withdraw the offending comment (as I already indicated). By the way, are you also going to be stepping back as a result of your equally "racist" remarks in response, or are are comments only "racist" when you feel insulted? Rockpocket 01:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GH, I find your cultivation of offence rather ridiculous, holding onto this supposed racist insult for weeks before mentioning it, then raising it centrally. I suggest you get over it. If you are seriously still offended I suggest raising an RfC as Rock has already suggested. Please don't keep moaning about it without taking it forward; either forgive, forget and move on, or take it further. --John 14:03, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad John to know where you stand on this. No need for RfC, a simple unreserved withdrawl would have done nicely. GH 01:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I direct you to my question above. How does one withdraw what has already been deleted? Tell me that, i'll do it "unreservedly" and we can all move on. If you are not willing to tell me how I can resolve this to your liking, yet bleat on about how I haven't done so, then I am left with the impression that creating drama is the whole point of this charade.

Quite frankly, I'm tired of it now and my patience is wearing thin. You have shopped your complaint around the most sympathetic forum you can find, ignoring the proper course of action after multiple people told you how to proceed, and still no-one is joining your crusade. Its patently clear your opinion is not shared by the community, therefore if you continue to make allegations of racism against me I will make a request that another administrator review your actions as a form of harrassment. Please leave me alone and do something constructive. Thank you. Rockpocket 03:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you all the best in your editing/admin work. GH 22:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• My last word on this. The basic problem is that certain editors, most probably well-intentioned, have, what I believe to be a morbid interest in projecting themselves onto Irish orientated pages, setting themselves up as expert mediators, but actually causing more conflict and dispute. The general style is unctuous , self-righteous, and quite often of a waxy elitist nature. There will be no Irish editors of merit remaining on these pages soon, and therefore no Irish admins with any true expertise will emerge into the future. Sorry if some editors don't like what they read, but that's the way it is, and it's not my intention to cause upset to anyone. GH 10:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I take it that "certain editors" refers to me. Thats fine, you are welcome to your opinion on the matter, and I am happy to discuss this with you. I'm sorry you feel that way, but the problem on these pages existed long before I arrived on the scene. The problem with the "irish editors" that you fear leaving is that they continually and persistantly abuse our policies. You seem very quick to criticise the person issuing a block for this, without ever commenting on the behaviour that led to the block. Is this the actions of an "Irish editor of merit"? If you are so interested in striking a neutral tone, why don't you condemn poor behaviour all around?

The irony here is is have no interest in Irish oriented pages at all. None whatsoever. I have no political axe to grind, no inclination to support "the British" or "The Irish" POV. What I do care about is Wikipedia's policies. And what it appears you don't like, is someone who is unwillilng to tolerate the unbelievably poor behaviour that has pervaded these articles any longer. If editors from either side are unwilling to adhere to our policies then too bad, we can do without them. Simple as that. And if asking nicely and offer friendly advice doesn't get through, then too bad, curt tones and blocks will happen until these articles are free of people POV warring from both sides.

The role of an admin is not to be people's friends, but to ensure the integrity and smooth running of the project. I'm sorry you find me unctious or elitist in my contributions to the category debate, but that doesn't really matter to me. I don't care if you don't like me personally, or you object to my style. What matters is that reasonable editors are now engaging and close to finding a NPOV solution to the debate. Those whose only interest was in promoting thier POV are marginalised by the community and/or soon to be sanctioned by Arbcom. The project wins.

So, my advice to you, is rather than complain about how the behaviour of everyone else causes us to lose Irish editors, spend at least as much time asking these editors why the can't/wont edit in a civil manner and obey our policies in the first place. Since I will be only too happy to go away and never visit and Irish article again when everyone stops acting as if Wikipedia is an extension of the Troubles, where those with opinions different from theirs are seen as enemies rather than colleagues. Rockpocket 00:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disliked the self-congratulatory barn-star sending, gloating frenzy amongst certain editors when Vk got indef block. It was very unbecoming, distasteful and ultimately vulgar. Rockpocked, this week you said to another editor, that sometimes you had to "edit in" edits that you didn't particularly like, it's a paraphrase, hope you know what I'm referring to. Well I too know what it's like to do that, and I always look at the Big Picture when I add to WP, and I do dislike talk pages, for there is must wasted energy in many of them. I am extremely neutral and middle of the road. I don't enjoy to see real editors blocked, just because some admins disagree with their approach. WP is full of trollers who make very few edits, and rarely get blocked at all, not that I'm advocating blocks on anyone. I do believe short blocks in certain circumstances can be appropriate. Problem is we end up with an imbalance on WP, and then WP ceases to reflect the real world. We could have a mantra, all right-wing editors welcome, all left-wing editors unwelcome. Where does that leave WP, it actually leaves it with little credibility. Getting late, a bit tired, therefore brief reply. GH 01:34, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]