User talk:Ghmyrtle/Archive 13

Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15→Archive 20

"The Beatles" versus "the Beatles"

There is currently a vote taking place and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 01:38, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Life is very short, and there's no time for fussing and fighting, my friend. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:54, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Robert Tear

has died. Great loss; great voice. Kittybrewster ☎ 13:56, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Regions of England.

I don't think that your argument for the reversion to the old name is good. The lead makes clear what the purpose is - NUTS. There is a history section, but most of the stufff pre the accession to the EEC is just fanciful. None of it is particularly relevant to the article and could be dropped. The history also makes clear that "The English regions, which initially numbered ten, have since also replaced the Standard Statistical Regions". That wikipage would be a better home for such historical discussion. I propose to revert to the NUTS name in 3 days unless I hear a reasonable argument not to. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:03, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The fact that the regions are NUTS regions is relevant and interesting, but a very, very small part of the history of the regional subdivision of England - as, for that matter, is the division of the history into "before" and "after" accession to the EU. These things are simply not very important in the overall scheme of things. The "purpose" of regions is not NUTS - they are regional subdivisions that have developed over centuries, particularly the last 100 years. None of the article is "fanciful", though no doubt it could be better referenced. Sorry, but your arguments are so preposterous that it's hard to know where to start in arguing against them. If you want to pursue this issue I suggest you raise it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject England. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:11, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

To avoid an edit war, I've lodged a proposal in the article discussion page and the project page. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

The Miami Showband

Ghmyrtle, I hope you don't mind, but I just nominated The Miami Showband for a DYK. I have already added the necessary refs in the article to back up the hook. Cheers!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:35, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Unnecessary and Inappropriate revision of my edits

Please try actually READING my edit summaries and the article in question's talk page YOURSELF before you make any more short-sighted unnecessary and inappropriate revisions of perfectly valid and constructive edits.

I find it HIGHLY ironic that you posted the following message on my User talk page:

“ Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit at 2011 United Kingdom protests removed content from Wikipedia. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:55, 7 April 2011 (UTC)”

79.69.107.104 (talk) 17:21, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Apologies

Sorry about my impromptu changes last night. I now see using McAlea instead of Lee in the article about the band itself is akin to calling Bill Wyman Perks througout the Rolling Stones' article. Oh, the DYK has been passed, and it's good to go!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

DYK for The Miami Showband

The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Over 5,000 hits!

Ghmyrtle, I see The Miami Showband article got over 5,000 hits!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:11, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Jessestone.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Jessestone.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 17:24, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

Fair use rationale for File:Jimmyliggins.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Jimmyliggins.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 10:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I've tried to give valid rationale to the image, but it's no really 'my bag'. Could you check what I've added and try to correct me where I've mucked up. I'm not sure if ACE records is the British or American outfit. FruitMonkey (talk) 23:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Try these as a resource for record ratings

http://books.google.com/advanced_book_search?q=slow+jitter&lr=&as_pt=

http://cashboxmagazine.com/archives/50s_files/50s.html
The scanned versions of Billboard you can find at the google advanced book search site are as close to 1st person contemporary as you will find. Steve Pastor (talk) 16:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Is this in relation to "Shake, Rattle and Roll"? I know I could go through all the scanned online Billboard magazines, but I was hoping someone would have the pre-1955 Whitburn lists. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:11, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

Guy Fawkes Night

If like me you still think there needs to be more on current Guy Fawkes Night commemorations them please leave a message on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Guy Fawkes Night/archive1 . If you don't then comments to that affect would also be appreciated. -- PBS (talk) 14:41, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

My sincere apologies

... for the unintended implication here that I was referring to you specifically-- I was not, and apologize for my sloppiness and any resulting offense. I was referring to global issues that are occurring on this FAC, and recognizing that while you are new to FAC and might not realize this is not how FACs proceed, PBS should know better by now. I hope you will continue to contribute, as I haven't found your commentary to be offensive as several others, and it appears that you have good-faith comments to add-- I just didn't want to see you following the inappropriate examples left by others, as other editors' behavior is not typical to how FAC works. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: Peter Jay and the Jaywalkers

GeoCities is supposed to have shut down in 2009; I have no idea why that one page still functions. Leaving aside the question of whether a GeoCities page is really a reliable source, you may want to find a new source in case the oversight is remedied. Until that time, I have added a bot exclusion to the page so AnomieBOT will not edit it. Anomie⚔ 17:58, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

username

How do I change my username I have been told tO?

kind regards x —Preceding unsigned comment added by Suebarker (talk • contribs) 21:48, 7 May 2011 (UTC)


RFC discussion of User:Philip Baird Shearer

A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of Philip Baird Shearer (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Philip Baird Shearer. -- Parrot of Doom 10:51, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

Raffaele Bendandi

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Raffaele Bendandi. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

  1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

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. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

Please stop edit warring at Raffaele Bendandi. By my count you have made 10 16 reverts in the past 24 hours. The three revert rule only allows you to do three reverts in one article! -- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:35, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Most of the reverts were of - to all intents and purposes - vandalism. Now that you have provided a source, we are discussing it on the article talk page - and I am partly agreeing with you. What is the problem? Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:38, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Please do not call a content dispute with IP editors "vandalism", as you seem to have done here. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:48, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

Star

The Editor's Barnstar
For work on Origins of rock and roll. SilkTork *Tea time 20:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
You might give some consideration to nominating it for GA listing. Check the criteria, and if it looks OK then follow the advice on WP:GAN. SilkTork *Tea time 20:45, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Play nice

Play nice. There's enough ill feeling without you stirring the pot too. --RA (talk) 22:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Not my intention to "stir" at all. Continuing discussion at your talk page. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:04, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

United Kingdom

My stable presence & wisdom, were required. GoodDay (talk) 12:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

PS: I like your proposal at 12:22 UTC, btw. GoodDay (talk) 13:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

RE:

Hey there, I would normally use the rollback on twinkle....but for some reason it automatically sent me back to the page without doing anything. I think it was an error with my browser! --Τασουλα (Shalom!) (talk) 21:05, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to St John's Jerusalem, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please do not add hoax tags claiming justification on the talk page without even mentioning it there. Stellas4lunch (talk) 21:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Now are you insulted?

And Two

See here for todays latest from our hoaxers --Snowded TALK 18:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Snowded/Ghmyrtle, I will not warn you again about WP:Sock, WP:AGF, WP:Civility or indeed WP:Bite. Earlymorningcans (talk) 18:16, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Oh please do, its providing light relief --Snowded TALK 18:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
As has been made clear, this concerned body of god fearing citizens finds nothing at all amusing about violations of WP:Sock and niether should you. Earlymorningcans (talk) 18:26, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
To coin a phrase, giggle giggle. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:33, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Hey, that's one of my catch-phrases. GoodDay (talk) 16:24, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
No!!!.... GD is full of surprises. <<<<< N.B. irony. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:04, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Earlymorningcans_.2F_User:Trumpkin. --RA (talk) 18:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

... and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Stellas4lunch. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:10, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
god fearing citizens?! Oh, this is getting fun. Which god are we supposed to fear? Neptune, Apollo, Thor or Hades?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:33, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
There is Only One. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:22, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Doesn't look atall like me. GoodDay (talk) 16:25, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Harassment

Please desist from your harassment and false accusations. I was cleared of any association with Stellas4lunch by the CheckUser report. I am a wikipedia editor of five years, while this Stellas4lunch was created in the past couple of months and we have no association. Again I ask you to please halt your personal attacks. Grand High Most Ultimate Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia, the Universe and all parallel Universes (including Ireland and Wales) (talk) 10:43, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

(mostly neutral observer) Anyone who has to defend themselves repeatedly by stating the length of time they've been on Wikipedia is acting suspiciously, imo. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
And especially when an editor needs to include superlatives in his/her user name.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 12:28, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Trumpkin claimed to be ************, but he should have grown up a bit by now. I just wish he would come clean, confess all, and accept that he's been silly. He's obviously intelligent, and the sort of person who could perhaps be turned round to become a serious contributor. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:32, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Please don't reveal personal information about me. Grand High Most Ultimate Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia, the Universe and all parallel Universes (including Ireland and Wales) (talk) 13:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I am indeed a serious contributor, every one of my edits to a Wikipedia page has been such (yet I have been falsely accused of sock puppetry because of 'similar behaviour'!). It is the edits of the people whom you accuse me of being that are disruptive! Please carry out whatever checks you deem necessary but then allow me to continue to edit constructively in peace! Grand High Most Ultimate Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia, the Universe and all parallel Universes (including Ireland and Wales) (talk) 16:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
If you want to help me be constructive could you help me out on the page list of stadiums - the plural of 'stadium' is 'stadia' as per stadium but I am not sure how to rename the page and put a redirect in place. Grand High Most Ultimate Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia, the Universe and all parallel Universes (including Ireland and Wales) (talk) 16:21, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Stadia vs Stadiums

While the article (Stadium) suggests that stadiums as plural is in common usage it makes clear that the etymologically correct plural form is 'stadia', the fact that this is one for the 'sticklers' (quote) does not make it any less correct. Could you help me to correct this on the other concerned pages. Grand High Most Ultimate Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia, the Universe and all parallel Universes (including Ireland and Wales) (talk) 16:34, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm rather fond of correcting grammar; this was my motive in fixing many of the British-related articles which contained the plural 'cannons' rather than the correct 'cannon'; though if you see any pages I missed I would appreciate your assistance in this task also. Grand High Most Ultimate Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia, the Universe and all parallel Universes (including Ireland and Wales) (talk) 16:37, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't really want to get involved on that article, or associated articles - but you need to look at Talk:Stadium#Stadium vs. Stadia. The consensus seems to be (as I thought) that "stadiums" is correct in English (not in Latin, obviously) - but the opening sentence does seem confusing. I strongly suggest that you do not go round changing things that have been discussed on article talk pages, without getting agreement first. Longer term, you might want to get involved in Wikipedia:WikiProject Grammar - if your other problems here are resolved. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:41, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your advice. However, I would rather not get involved in any form of authoritarian programme which attempts to suppress free speech. Grand High Most Ultimate Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia, the Universe and all parallel Universes (including Ireland and Wales) (talk) 16:53, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
The problem is with editors who read WP:IAR without first realising that, in fact, some rules are very helpful. If you keep asserting your right to "free speech" without considering the views of fellow editors, your time here will be painful and brief, unfortunately. Wikipedia works by collaboration and consensus - you can (perhaps) be part of that, or you can exclude yourself, or be excluded. Your choice. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:56, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
As I believe Snowded is infamous for asserting, Wikipedia is not a democracy. If consensus in breach of proper fact, then consensus be damned. British government documents use stadia not stadiums. Grand High Most Ultimate Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia, the Universe and all parallel Universes (including Ireland and Wales) (talk) 17:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Quite possibly, but what about the rest of the world? Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:38, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trumpkin (talk • contribs) 21:56, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Sampling

If the sampling of Spirit in the Sky doesn't belong in the introduction, where else should it be put?--90.220.160.147 (talk) 19:49, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

If you can find published reliable sources that point out similarities to the Canned Heat song, it can be mentioned in the main article section about Greenbaum's version. But if there are no such sources, it's your own original research and it should not be included at all. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:55, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

United Kingdom

We're having an article meltdown. BTW, would you believe I hadn't noticed until a few days ago, that British Isles wasn't in the intro? Danged if I'm gonna try implement it, though. GoodDay (talk) 20:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

The E/N/S/W gang, continue to stagnate. GoodDay (talk) 16:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

Proposed deletion of Czyz Records

The article Czyz Records has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article has not been improved upon since October 9th, 2007, and is an orphan. Tagged for notability since April, 2008. db-corp may apply, but felt prodding was the safer route to take.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 14:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Thought I'd drop by. Seems a shame to delete this one! Cheers. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:06, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't know if you want to fight a battle over this one old boy or, frankly, if I have anything useful to help the cause, anyhow you know where I am. At least you know I did not succumb to the perils of the River Dee or the Llangollen canal (as if that helps) ! Cheers,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:29, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, guys. I don't think I had anything much to do with the text of that article - it was in the long ago and forgotten days of my youth, but I think someone added it to the wrong article (Chess Records perhaps?) and I just started a stub to move the text into. Anyway, I know nothing about the company, and I don't have any views on whether the article stays or goes. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Czyz Records for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Czyz Records is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Czyz Records until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 21:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Talk:United Kingdom#Edits by AgadaUrbanit, DeCausa and Ghmyrtle made this morning

Looking over your earlier comments I might have inadvertantly over-stated (misrepresented?) your view in my opening post to this thread. I think you were also looking at keeping open the possibility a vote on options and mediation. Apologies, it wasn't intentional. Can post a correction if you would like. DeCausa (talk) 18:45, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

No, it looked fine to me. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:14, 28 May 2011 (UTC)


The Barnstar of Diplomacy
For outstanding persistence and patience in getting consensus on the lead to the United Kingdom article. The Untied Nations needs you. SabreBD (talk) 11:09, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Its a high bar - I never felt the need to award one of these before. Many thanks for your efforts on this debate.SabreBD (talk) 11:09, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely! DeCausa (talk) 12:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
One question - are the "Untied (sic) Nations" what happens after the SNP's referendum?  :) Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
I would have corrected it but it seems so appropriate.--SabreBD (talk) 12:55, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

diddley bow

What evidence do you have regarding the origins of the diddly bow? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.123.255.181 (talk) 00:59, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I've added a couple of references to the Diddley bow article - there are many more. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:56, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Where did these West Africans get metal strings for these instruments? They had no metal making abilities. The guitar/lute was being used in Europe for centuries. All this diddly bow is is a cheap-homemade-one-string-"guitar". Just how did the West Africans make these? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.121.21.88 (talk) 14:32, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I am not an expert on African stringed instruments - I am reporting what sources like this say. Presumably the instruments originally used other materials for the strings. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:48, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, there WERE stringed instruments in Europe, including guitars, prior to 1555, therefore this 'speculation' about brought over from Africa is flakey. Why didn't these Africans go on to invent the electric guitar? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.121.21.64 (talk) 12:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:DNFTT. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

Why delete the Welsh Names that I've put on certain settlements?

Hi Ghmyrtle, I believe u deleted the Welsh name for Birkenhead and Cambridge which is PATHETIC! Why does everyone from Wikipedia delete what I've put? I'm not a troll, I'm some person who's trying 2 help Wikipedia add flavour to English settlements to interest Welsh people and English people!

If u think I'm some nobody who doesn't put appropriate things on English settlements then u would have deleted it but because I was trying 2 b nice by including the Welsh names on each settlement, u and everybody else has NO RIGHT 2 delete what I've put!

Oh and one more thing: I know what to do when finishing off messages because u think I'm dumb and a foolish person and just like that Simple Bob user, u r also found 2 b a grumpy and angry man!

I will b adding Welsh names 2 English settlements whether u guys from Wikipedia like it or not!

NoRtHWeSt93 (talk) 12:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)NoRtHWeSt93NoRtHWeSt93 (talk) 12:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah well, so much for me leaving nice friendly messages on your talk page for you to read and learn from.  :-) Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:28, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:ZE Christmas 2004.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:ZE Christmas 2004.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 13:20, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruby Turner

I saw her in concert last night - great voice, great show. A favour of you is needed please. Could you take a squint at your US Billboard R&B chart book, and let me know of her presence therein. Allmusic seems to indicate none at all; which I am much inclined to disbelieve. Alternatively, you could do me two favours and enter the info in her article. Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem sir! My R&B chart book only goes up to 1995 though, so I don't have information on anything later than that. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:50, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Perfect - many thanks, old boy.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:17, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Here's a good quiz question for you. Who was the first British-born artist to reach the top of the US R&B chart? Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:21, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that is a good one. Lulu he proffered, hopelessly clutching at straws? Also, who was the first American rock and roller to have a #1 UK album ? Whilst I am here, and back to before, you could consider articles for UK hit makers Michael Cox, The Coronets, Clyde Valley Stompers, The Cherokees or even The Cheetahs - or not, as the mood takes you.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Not right. If you exclude Carl Douglas, Billy Ocean, Ruby Turner, Terence Trent d'Arby and Sade (not UK-born), and exclude parts of duos (Paul McCartney with Michael Jackson) or bands (Soul II Soul), the answer seems to be (WP:OR warning...).... Lisa Stansfield..!! Well, I thought it was interesting.... Hmm.. thanks for the suggestions. Surprised about Michael Cox - I'll look into it! Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
PS: Freddie Cannon? Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:14, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
PPS: See Michael Cox (singer). Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Well done - for some reason I thought Cox was long since dead - obviously not. Funny isn't it how some from that era, like Marty Wilde, Joe Brown etc., thrived whilst many, usually those with the Meek connection, fell away to obscurity. That's life. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:24, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Well, I don't know that he's dead, put it like that... (unless you tell me different, of course!) Listening to this, he was actually quite good! Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:29, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
No - it was just a feeling, rather than anything tangible. Yeah, that's a decent song of the day, well sang. Looking at the surrounding publicity stuff, perhaps the likes of Adam Faith and Billy Fury had a real edge in the 'looks' front, which might have been the undoing of Cox. Not that I am any judge of bloke appeal ! Or it might have been the 'curse of Meek'. Purely my opinion of course, but everything he touched lasted for a very short timespan. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I suppose Meek was into the sound of the record itself, rather than the quality of the song or the uniqueness of the performer. The performers had to fit in with his expectations, rather than being able to express themselves - so they never developed a clear identity. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:11, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes well done, The Explosive Freddy Cannon was indeed the first. Dear old Lisa, well well well. A better answer than bloody Lulu !?! Actually the British Hit Singles & Albums does state she (Stansfield that is) is the only UK act to have had three US R&B chart-toppers. Also an old mate of mine did some extensive, and well paid, carpentry work on Stansfield's home studio, back in the day (and got name checked on one of her album sleeves) ! It's the circles I move in, of course. I mean, who else can claim to have met Bill Drummond (KLF) in a prison (it's true, I did).

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

Welsh article needed please

Sir Paul Michael Williams, OBE, OStJ, DL, Lately Director-General, Health and Social Services, Welsh Assembly Government and Chief Executive, NHS Wales. Kittybrewster ☎ 11:59, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Stub started. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Northern soul musicians

Hi, any suggestions as to what this might be more accurately be renamed to? I saw there was no Category, created one and tried to keep its name short mainly so editors might find it and it began with the words 'Northern soul'. It is difficult to pin down because, as you probably know, music as diverse and Motown flag-bearers, The Four Tops and the Isley Brothers, Helen Shapiro, Dusty Springfield and the theme from Hawaii Five-O were popular within Northern Soul.--Egghead06 (talk) 11:00, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Thinking about it further, it probably is the best name. My only point was that, in most if not all cases, the musicians didn't see themselves as playing "Northern soul" - that was a tag attached to their records (and sometimes performances) by the followers of the genre itself or those who so labelled it - unlike, say, "Southern soul", which was soul music performed by musicians from The South, not necessarily music danced to by people south of Watford! Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:08, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

South West "England"

I've finished editing South West England for the time being, feel free to re-edit if you wish. Govynn (talk) 22:10, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

The Federal Police is on to you!

You racist anti-Australian! I WILL get the Federal Police on you to put you in prison! AUSSIE PRIDE!--58.178.146.217 (talk) 08:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

"British Isles"

Hi there,

The issue is well highlighted within the article itself but yet the contradiction is mainatined. Ireland is not part of the British Isles and the use of the term is inflamatory and offensive in Ireland. Even official UK government policy strongly discourages its use. It has no legal or constitutional basis but yet you have taken it upon yourself to include Ireland. The only historical basis for the term is geographical and even this is no longer tenable.

Funny how it is only Britsh people that keep insisting on this! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Partyguinness (talk • contribs) 10:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

You may well have grounds for your views, but the established position here, based on multiple previous discussions and multiple sources, is that the term "BI" includes Ireland. Whether I personally agree with that or not is irrelevant (and you don't know what I think). You need to make your case for changing the article, through discussing it on the article talk page with other editors, rather than trying to impose your own opinion. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:53, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Anglo-Cornish

Hello again, This article has been a hive of activity recently: writing articles on dialects is remarkably difficult given the historical aspects and expertise required to interpret the many and varied sources of evidence. Thank you for the credit you have given at DYK (not an area I have been involved with at all). The 19th century works such as those by Courtney & Couch, and Fred Jago were handicapped by the lack of a sound methodology. That only came later from German linguists who passed on their knowledge to those involved in the Survey of English Dialects. The large block of text with sophisticated citations is a component of Cornish people (largely due to User:Jza84). It was perhaps lucky I saw this article at all: it was only through User:Govynn revising Cornwall that I noticed it. Best wishes.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 12:31, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Having a lie down

I have just completed my 40,000th edit - all of them sub-standard of course, so we are off to Bruges later today for a rest; back on 30 June. Cheers,Derek R Bullamore (talk) 10:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations/commiserations on your/our commitment/wikiholism! I'm off to Cornwall myself in a couple of days time - no doubt we'll be busy when we get back, reverting the world to its rightful state..... Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Britain = England + Wales

Not joking, just a bit too pedantic for you perhaps. I know people sloppily refer to Britain when they mean Great Britain or UK but the fact is they are three differently defined areas which my revision sought to explain.

I see now that there has been lots of trivial discussion about this already and the sloppy usage has prevailed on Wikipedia. A pity since it makes it harder to be precise about things.

I don't indulge in edit wars so that's the end of my attempt to improve this article. Doug (at Wiki) 22:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes. England and Wales is a political identity but Britain is (was?) the name of the geographic area. This distinction was well known 50 years ago, when I was at school, but seems to have been lost now. I can still find several references to this concept on the web, including a school teaching the idea (http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/questions/britain/britain.htm ) but I don't think it's important enough to be worth fighting to retain it. It will die out with us older guys. Doug (at Wiki) 23:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
It actually has come up before, I find. It's on Talk: British Isles Archive page 15. I quote -
But Thark, that is one of the principle foundations of your argument, "that there is a name". But there is no real name for the islands west of Europe. The term "British Isles" was handy when England dominated Scotland, Wales and Ireland, but Britain is England and Wales, and not Scotland or Ireland. There is no real name for this place. -78.19.171.224 (talk) 18:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Nobody seemed to take much notice! Doug (at Wiki) 22:52, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Cornwall

I'm intrigued by the links between our friend User:MJC59, this site that he espouses, and the contributions made here by our other friend User:Govynn. Does anyone hear any quacking noises? I'm off to the land-at-the-south-west-tip-of-Britain this very afternoon, so will report back in due course.... Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Quack quack indeed. I would also throw Muggetypie (talk · contribs) into the pot as well. The all seem to be wearing the same socks. --Simple Bob a.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 13:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Completely agree. The fact that the article had remained stable for a good period and was suddenly interrupted in the same period by two similar sounding (grammatical similarities, POVs), and attitudes (unwillingness to read or consider WP policies while at the same time condemning them - despite not knowing what they are), claiming WP editors are "idiots" and "morons"...do please report back. Mac Tíre Cowag 13:42, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Agree with the inclusion of Muggetypie (talk · contribs) in any investigation. Mac Tíre Cowag 13:43, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
I'll leave it to you all (y'all?) to sort anything out - I'll be escaping WP for a few days here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Enjoy - just remember not to bring up the whole "county" thing while you're there ;) Mac Tíre Cowag 13:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm packing my passport... Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:48, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Probably not worth doing anything right now. I already have MJC59 at WP:AN3 and like any naughty puppy he/she will soon tire out after playing and lie down for a long whimper-filled sleep. Of course, if they come back... Enjoy the trip. Pack some wellies. I saw the Glastonbury site this morning and it is horribly muddy so no reason to believe Cornwall is any different. So which one of you was it? ;) --Simple Bob a.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 13:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Godhvos is a sufficiently unusual name for the user of the same name to have some connection with the site, and for MJC59 to suddenly start supporting a 12-page wiki is suspicious. Time for a visit to SPI. Nev1 (talk) 13:54, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
But Cornwall is in the North don't you see...Mac Tíre Cowag 13:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
I just looked at the Wikia site and was amused to see some of the recent contributions. Looks like someone is taking their Wikia wiki as seriously as they seem to be treating Wikipedia. "Pastie eating pixie shaggers" had me spraying herbal tea all over my keyboard. --Simple Bob a.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 14:13, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I was about to suggest someone had been reaching in their sock-drawer recently (what with contributions, language styles etc), but I see that a case has already been made. Hope the Cornish treat you well Ghmyrtle! (We don't all mind you upcounty folk!) Cheers, Zangar (talk) 14:06, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

Don Robey

My bad on the link in 20 June edit. The problem has been corrected. Robey's criminal background and methods are now front and center. And documented by a very reliable living source--Jerry Leiber. Cheers. Tapered (talk) 18:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Anglo-Cornish

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

Orphaned non-free image File:Gabler.jpg

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Non-Free rationale for File:Lizzymd.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Lizzymd.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:44, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15→Archive 20