User talk:Timrollpickering/Archive 1

< User talk:Timrollpickering

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Timrollpickering (talk | contribs) at 14:40, 28 December 2006 (Borrow the CFD templates for background effects - will modify text). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:40, 28 December 2006 by Timrollpickering (talk | contribs) (Borrow the CFD templates for background effects - will modify text)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Timrollpickering. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

→

Universities

Hi Tim

Given your edits on universities, I thought you might be interested in Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Universities. Warofdreams 15:53, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Types of universities and schools

User Mark McCaghrey adds:

Thank for your correction regarding Campus Universities not being Red Brick Unversities. I was just about to make the correction myself (as the orginal author) having done a bit more reading about the subject on Misplaced Pages) but have replaced the reference as they are often refered to as Red Brick even if this is not strictly accurate.

However I want to dispute your deletion of my reference to public/private schools (and also the main public school article). I think the terms are used synonymously and is particularly pertitant to a discussion about higher education. As an ex-public school boy who did not go to Oxbridge I know the bias towards Oxbridge from Public schools, but also am descendents who faced the bias from the other direction.

Is there a form of words which you would be happy with to include the reference to public schools?

I've *never* heard "Red Brick" used to describe the 1960s universities (which is what the article is clearly referring to). "Glass Plate" isn't universal, but "Robbins Report" is a strange term which hasn't caught on due to many not know what it means and "New Universities" has to compete with even newer institutions.

As someone who went to both a public school and a private school that is most definitely *not* a public school, the difference between the two is very clear. "Public school" carries connotations of an outlook, an ethos, a style of teaching, traditions, even vocabulary and so forth and means so much more than just "the parents write a cheque for their offspring's tuition". There are many private schools which do not conform to such traditions - the Etons and Harrows are very much in a classification of their own.

They may be used in general conversations synomously but Misplaced Pages is against using misleading terms on the basis of generic use - look for example at the reasons why "Charles, Prince of Wales" is used instead of "Prince Charles" which is what he is invariably called, even on some biographies (or even "Charles Windsor"/"Charles Mountbatten-Windsor" one of which I'd guess is what would go on a standard form that just asks for first and surnames).

I can't think of an exact phrasing off hand - to be honest the point at hand is more relevant to other pages than to explaining what a campus university is - maybe the page on Glass Plate universities is better? Timrollpickering 22:24, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

University of London

Tim - fancy starting the University of London Union article?

A stub has begun - now has anyone got a massive store of ULU history to fill it up? ("Calling a certain member of ULU Council...") Timrollpickering 18:34, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks - fancy taking a look at British Institute in Paris which needs a bit of cleanup and name change I think. Same for St George's Hospital Medical School?

Tim -- nice to see the Category:Alumni of the University of London and Category:Lecturers of the University of London pages. However, I do worry slightly about using lecturers in the title. I deliberately called Category:UCL academics academics as a more inclusive word (on the grounds that academic encompasses researchers, and also points to the role of a lecturer or professor as both a person who lectures and a person who researches -- obviously we do not tend to say faculty in the UK). --stochata 22:30, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

People associated with universities

Hi Tim. It looks like you set up Category:Alumni of the University of Nottingham and Category:Lecturers of the University of Nottingham categories. I've cracked on with populating the alumni category, but I felt that 'lecturers' wasn't perhaps the best term for the other list. I think 'academics' would be broader / more inclusive. I think I would like to change this, but I thought I would give you a nod first so as not to cause offence! Thanks. Jamse 18:38, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I should read before I write! I've noticed now that stochata has made a similar point about University of London Lecturers. Searching via Category:People by university affiliation - UK I can spot a few others that are in the same form. I guess it would be helpful to obtain a consensus on which form is preferable and adopt that across the institutions. My preference is for 'academic' rather than lecturer, as it appears is stochata's. Do you have a specific preference for 'lecturer', or was that just what you happened to use on the day? Thanks. Jamse 18:46, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

It's kind of gone in a form following usage elsewhere which I've adhered to throughout. I suspect a general think is needed on a standard format for such categories as at the moment there's a lot of variation. Is there anywhere that such a broader decision could be taken? Timrollpickering 00:37, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

King's Medical Schools

Hi Tim - some advice might be appreciated on how to approach/combine King's College London, GKT School of Medicine and King's College School of Medicine and Dentistry. GKT no longer exists, the medical school is styled as per the GKT talk page describes but the College is very keen on integrating its faculities. Institute of Psychiatry is the most separate at present, hence probably warrants its own page, but should a level of continuity be applied? --Coffeelover 21:21, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

From what I can see it looks like GKT got renamed in a rebranding so perhaps make it a simple redirect page to KCL's SMD, unless there's masses of history that warrant a separate page to handle the GKT era (I suspect 7 years didn't produce much that's different from now).

For the main KCL page it's probably best to have sections on other institutions that merged in/were taken over and another on academic faculties and departments, with those that merit their own pages (especially anything that has a distinct independent history) linked to as the main article. The set-up for Queen Mary, University of London and Barts and The London, Queen Mary's School of Medicine and Dentistry is the best example I can think of (I wonder why? ;-) ) Hope this helps! Timrollpickering 01:21, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Edward VIII

From: Edward VIII of the United Kingdom: (although in Ireland his abdication did not take effect until the next day).

Are you sure you don't mean Northern Ireland? The Republic of Ireland, as the name suggests, has been a republic since 1915 and is not under the rule of the United Kingdom. -- Graham :) 12:52, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

It only became a Republic in 1949. And I did mean that, the North was and is part of the United Kingdom and so was covered by the same legislation as the rest of the UK. Timrollpickering 12:75 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Leaders of the House of Lords

Hi, I was wondering if you could fill in the gaps we have currently in leaders of the house of lords. Currently there's some big holes in the 1930s (1931-1935,1938-1940,1940-1941), and some other holes in the 18th century. Oh, and I wasn't too sure if Lord Lansdowne was the leader in Russell's first ministry - that was a kind of educated guess. john 23:21, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

My best guesses for the 1930s are:

Rufus Isaacs, 1st Marquess of Reading 1931

Douglas Hogg, 1st Viscount Hailsham 1931-1935

Charles Stewart Henry Vane-Tempest-Stewart, 7th Marquess of Londonderry 1935

Edward Frederick Lindley Wood, 3rd Viscount Halifax 1935-1938

James Stanhope, 7th Earl Stanhope 1938-1940

Thomas Walker Hobart Inskip, 1st Viscount Caldecote 1940

Edward Frederick Lindley Wood, 3rd Viscount Halifax 1940-1941

I'll revise that if I come across anything new. It's possible that the lists of government posts in The Times and /or Hansard include the Leaders of the Houses, so I'll take a look next time I have to get one out. Timrollpickering 05:14, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Cripps

I'm not sure what to make of your edits to Stafford Cripps.

You have deleted "In 1929 Cripps joined the Labour Party and was elected MP for a seat in Bristol" and replaced it with "In 1930 Cripps joined the Labour Party." Why have you deleted the fact of his election to Parliament? If he joined the Labour Party in 1930, then he must have been elected in 1929 while not a party member. I don't think that is the case.

I recall he only joined in 1930. He was elected in a by-election in 1931 primarily so he could fill the "technical" job of Solicitor General. Timrollpickering 10:33, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You have deleted "After a few months, however, Cripps resigned from his post and from the Labour Party in protest at MacDonald's policies, and in 1931 he retained his seat as an Independent Labour candidate." Why?

Because it's wrong. He was still a member of the government right up until it fell and was even asked by MacDonald to serve in the National Government. He refused. In the 1931 General Election he stood (and held his seat) as a Labour Party candidate, not an Independent Labour Party candidate. Timrollpickering 10:33, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You have substituted" In the 1931, Cripps was one of only three former Labour ministers to hold their seats and so became the number three in the Parliamentary Labour Party, under the leader George Lansbury and deputy leader Clement Attlee." This implies he was still a Labour MP, but I don't think this is the case.

Adam 03:04, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

He was indeed - one of the few to survive the landslide. Timrollpickering 10:33, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Why would a Labour Party member who objected to MacDonald's policies in 1931 have quit the Labour Party? The whole Labour Party objected to MacDonald's policies and kicked him out. john 05:14, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

He quit before MacDonald did his deal with Baldwin and got expelled. Adam 05:18, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Whilst true that some Labour members were deserting in disillusionment with the Labour Government, Cripps wasn't one of them. Timrollpickering 10:33, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The Times (October 29, 1931) reveals that Tim is right on all counts and my original source (Colliers) was wrong. "Trust not to encyclopedias." Adam 10:59, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Railways

I don't see your name on the Talk:Rail transport in the United Kingdom/Alternate naming schemes voting roll... --Tagishsimon

It is now! ;-) Timrollpickering 20:39, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Sterling work on the Stations, Tim. I'd join in your effort, but I'm simply lost in admiration ;) --Tagishsimon

Links to the Conservative Party

I think you should stop changing links for the Conservative party, while the name of the page is under discussion. Mintguy (T) 11:55, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

Sorry hadn't seen that it was shifting. It came because I followed one redirect that led to another and needed fixing, then I looked at the list and saw a whole stack of problems. Timrollpickering 12:03, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

Yeah Adam Carr moved the page, and them left the broken redirects to fester. IIRC he has a habit of doing this kind of thing. Mintguy (T) 12:04, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

Stations

So what exactly was the point in moving 'Birmingham New Street Station' to 'Birmingham New Street railway station' I've never heard it called that before nor any other of the Birmingham stations. Is there any need to add 'railway' to the title of a station unless it is being disambiguated from a bus station or something? G-Man 22:23, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

This stems from moves to bring consistency across Misplaced Pages on the names of UK railway stations - the standard format being "Place railway station" for a station that just has just rail (as New Street does at present) and "Place station" for a station with other systems like trams, tubes/metros or Docklands Light Railway. The idea was floated on Talk:Rail transport in the United Kingdom#Station names - a need for consistency and the idea of copying the model developed for London (as part of WikiProject London) did not meet with objections. Timrollpickering 22:33, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

East Antrim

I see you just created East Antrim (constituency). Are you sure you don't want to make that just East Antrim? As I write this, there is no article with that title, but there is an article that tries to link to it. See also County Antrim. - dcljr 17:40, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

For all the Northern Ireland constituencies I've done so far I've put (constituency) in them for disambiguation. This is because several of them (and some non-Northern Ireland seats) share names with different boundaries - for example North Down (constituency) is a little larger than the district of North Down (and prior to 1983 the difference was bigger). Antrim could conceivably refer to the district, the county or the pre 1950 constituency - a clear need for disambiguation. I think it works to have the same tag for all constituencies rather than have some with tags.

I'll amend the links to the short form, as I've done with for South Antrim. Timrollpickering 18:34, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

By-election maps

Help yourself, they're GFDL'd.

I can't help thinking that describing constituencies is a bit like painting the Forth Bridge - they will mostly change around 2009.

--Keith Edkins 19:05, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It's rare for a substantial number to be replaced - usually most of the seats survive in either the same or a modified form. It's a bit of a project at first but I reckon it's worth doing since relying on the page on the relevant unit of local government can be messy given different boundaries. Timrollpickering 19:28, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Robert McCartney - Party Label?

Tim,

Do you have any idea of Bob McCartney's (N Down) party label between his first election in 1995 to the NI forum election in 1996? David Boothroyd claims that he used the 'UK Unionist' label for ballot access and founded the party a year later. He wrote:

He sought election as a 'United Kingdom Unionist'. In May 1996 he and his supporters formed the United Kingdom Unionist Party.

Nicholas Whyte writes that he used the UKUP name all along:

Robert McCartney soon declared himself as the candidate of the newly formed UK Unionist Party...

I've been unsure for a while. At List of UK by-elections currently has him as UKUP. - iHoshie 06:30, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Part of the problem is that at the time there was no legislation defining a political party (nowadays you could use their presence or not on the register as a benchmark) and a candidate could use any or no description on their ballot paper (nowadays a non party candidate can't use a political description). When you have a label that is little more than a vehicle for an individual candidate, possibly with the adherence of a few local councillors, it's highly debatable whether this consituted a party or not.

I recall McCartney at one point after his first election did talk about having to "turn himself into a political party" for the 1996 Forum elections (fought on a party list system) - perhaps the truest is that the political party proper was founded after his election but he used the label in the interim. The campaign literature I've seen was certainly for "United Kingdom Unionist" - the absence of "Party" says nothing as a lot of others don't use it (e.g. the "Conservative candidate). See here Timrollpickering 09:19, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

McCartney had little time to prepare for the 1995 byelection (the sitting MP died suddenly) and so he fought it as an independent 'United Kingdom Unionist'. He only formed the party in 1996 when the Forum elections were in prospect. The government invited parties and independent candidates to register to fight the elections, and the participants were then named in the primary legislation (see Northern Ireland (Entry to Negotiations) Act 1996, schedule 1). This forced him to set up a formal political party. Naturally he used the same label as the 1995 byelection for the name of the party. I may have a letter from the party confirming their entry in my book on Political Parties which includes this information, but I do know for certain that he did not appear on the ballot paper in 1995 with the work Party in his description, as I took a contemporary note. Dbiv 14:30, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Further to this I have just come across McCartney's book "Reflections on Liberty, Democracy and the Union" (2001) which states on page 8:

"In June 1995 I won a Parliamentary by-election in the North Down constituency following the death of James Kilfedder and thus took up a seat at Westminster that I have held ever since. In the spring of 1996 I became the leader of the newly formed UK/Unionist Party. This organisation immediately provided an institutional structure that could support the political precepts cherished by myself .." Dbiv 15:16, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Official invitation

Hi!

This is a message to let you know that there is now a UK-specific Misplaced Pages community page at Misplaced Pages:UK wikipedians' notice board. It would be great if you could come and get involved! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 22:51, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Mysteron deserter?

I notice that you were the one who added the theory about Captain Scarlet actually being a Mysteron deserter to the page. Where exactly does this theory come from? -- Antaeus Feldspar 05:07, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hehe it is in the first episode as I recall (and we are going into the dim and distant depths of my childhood here). Both he and Captain Black were captured and recruited by the Mysterons but Scarlet somehow escaped the clutches of the Mysterons whilst retaining his powers. Sjc 05:09, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It comes primarily from watching the first episode. Scarlet is replaced the same way that all replacements in subsequent episodes take place, so the man who falls off the plaform is probably still a Mysteron duplicate. Timrollpickering 18:43, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well, okay, I see where you're coming from... but the series acknowledges that Scarlet's body is, in fact, that of one of the Mysteron's duplicates. I believe that it's in "Spectrum Strikes Back" that they show one of the new devices they've come up with to counter the Mysterons, an X-Ray camera, and they use Scarlet to demonstrate how a Mysteron duplicate will show up differently on the camera than a regular object does. The series premise is that, alone out of all the Mysteron's duplicates, he has regained his original personality; your theory makes it sound like (I'm not sure if this is what you meant) he isn't the personality of Captain Scarlet, occupying a Mysteron-made duplicate of the body that used to be his, but instead one of the Mysterons themselves, occupying the duplicate of Captain Scarlet and pretending to be him.

I think maybe we should pull the "Mysteron deserter" theory (after all, no original research) but add in more about what the series establishes about what Scarlet is after his double-death. Sound good? -- Antaeus Feldspar 02:13, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Lord Runciman

In reply to your question to Lord Emsworth, the 1st Baron Runciman was simply Walter Runciman, like his son. Walter Runciman, 1st Baron Runciman would be a better place for him than Walter Runciman (father), though. (Perhaps the creation of the Viscountcy before the inheritance of the Barony could be mentioned in the text of the article, as it explains the presence of "of Doxford" in the title.) Proteus (Talk) 11:28, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

(I have not responded because Proteus has already done so. -- Emsworth 23:56, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC))

First Labour Hereditary Peer

I notice you have Earl De La Warr as the first hereditary peer to join the Labour Party. I have been doing a lot of research on the early history of the Labour Party in the House of Lords recently. It seems that there was no Labour organisation in the House until the first Labour Government was formed in 1924, but that prior to this point there were six Peers who had in some way supported the Labour Party.

Earl De La Warr, who was born in 1901 and succeeded to the title in 1915, supported the Labour Party from his late adolescence. However, reading the attendance list in the Lords Journals shows he attended only to take his seat on coming of age and to take the oath on the opening of the new Parliament, before he was appointed as a Minister in 1924. His maiden speech was his first from the front bench.

The Earl Russell was a Fabian and a member of the ILP from at least 1919.

The Earl of Kimberley had sent a message of support to the Labour candidate in South Norfolk in the 1918 general election and again in a 1920 byelection (earning him the nickname The Labour Earl in the newspapers). He was re-elected as a Labour candidate to Norfolk County Council in 1922. I would guess he was a party member from about 1920.

Viscount Haldane had spoken in support of Labour candidates in the 1923 general election, but until then had been a supporter of Asquith and the Liberal Party.

Lord Parmoor supported the Labour policy on peace in 1923 general election. The statement in "The British Labour Party" in the biography of his son Stafford Cripps that Parmoor had joined the party in 1921 would appear to be inaccurate from a reading of his memoirs, which state that he had no contact until after the 1923 election.

The 1st Earl of Loreburn (who died on 30th November 1923) had, according to the Oxford DNB, voted for Labour candidate in local election (possibly in 1922).

Is there anything you can add on the matter? I am linking in with a group which is doing more serious research on the history of the Labour Peers. Dbiv 14:15, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

To be honest not much - I found that note in a Google search and at first glance it seemed to match (I think I came across the info before a few years ago whilse researching my undergaduate dissertation but have no idea where) so I added it in to help prevent the page being a mere "he held this office then this ofice then this..." but this may well be one of those uncertainties that get put done as "facts" in the absence of anything else and then repeated ad infinitum.

Is there anything in David Marquand's biography of Ramsay MacDonald on this subject? If you want I can check it this evening. Timrollpickering 14:57, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Marquand's tome has been on my bedside for the past few days. He refers on page 150 to Macdonald's friendship with Lady Margaret Sackville "daughter of the Earl De La Warr" in 1912, presumably the aunt of the 9th Earl, but all the other references are to National Labour days when the Earl was one of his keenest supporters in Parliament. Dbiv 15:07, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Constituencies

I see you've been busy with constituencies. Soemone recently created Parliamentary Constituencies of the UK Parliament which I just moved to United Kingdom Parliamentary Constituencies. I see we already have a category. I have a list of MPs for Lewes going back to 1298, which I got from the library a few weeks ago. It appears that it is possible to obtain complete lists from http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATID=2218&CATLN=3&accessmethod=5. Mintguy (T) 03:45, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Don't bother with C 219, use the Return of Members of Parliament published in 1878 which is a compilation of them. It's in two parts each with two volumes (the list and an index), and covers all Parliaments of England, Ireland and Scotland up to 1885. There are normally some copies on ABE; I have one, and most large UK libraries can find one for you.

C219 contains the original returns which rarely add much of interest unless you want to get to the bottom of a dispute over who was the returning officer. Dbiv 10:22, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've discovered that you can get most of the volumes of "The History of the United Kingdom Parliament" on CD-ROM -see http://www.history.ac.uk/hop/. A snip at £525. I'll have to check whether any of the local libraries have it. Mintguy (T) 22:26, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I have this CD-ROM and heartily recommend it! It's got the full text of all the sections, except the most recent 1690-1715 and the Josiah Wedgwood volume which is considered superseded. There are some names of MPs discovered since which are added, mostly in the late 15th century. There are also, if you can get hold of them, several books published shortly after the Return of Members of Parliament which used it to provide the Parliamentary history of a local area, giving biographies if possible. W.R. Williams did several of them. Dbiv 00:17, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Winterton Earldom

It would appear that your sources are correct. The first six Earls Winterton were all named Edward Turnour; I seem to have forgotten to enter one of them in (this problem has been rectified). -- Emsworth 17:43, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Bias

I'd like your opinion at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration. Thanks. Chameleon 12:21, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

400,000th Article

These things are somewhat volatile, what with article deletions & all, but by my calculations, you appended the 400,000th article, in the form of Donald Bradley Somervell, Baron Somervell. At least, that's the cover story for Misplaced Pages:Announcements. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...

...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
...all articles...

using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Misplaced Pages is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. So far over 90% of people who have responded have done this.

Nutshell: Misplaced Pages articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to ] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

Option 2

I agree to ] all my contributions to any ], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}}. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. It's important to know, even if you choose to do anything so I don't keep asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk) 14:39, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

Andrew Hunter

I've just reverted your change to Andrew Hunter's party affiliation on MPs elected in the UK general election, 2001. Whilst I've seen the news coverage of his move (eg ), Parliament's website still lists his as an Independent Conservative , and I think it's probably best to use that as the most appropriate source. — OwenBlacker 01:52, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Assuming the Parliament website is up to date - the POV cynic in me would note that the maintainers have better things to do on a Friday evening than edit pages to keep up with egotistical MPs anxious to get their names in the headlines, especially as he's just formalising an existing move. Timrollpickering 11:41, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It's a fair comment :o)

I think I preferred the version that I reverted to the wording you've added, so I'll restore it now, with a link to — OwenBlacker 12:46, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Neville Chamberlain

Regarding succession, I went and created Template:Succession box three to three. There's a full list of such boxes over at Template_talk:Succession box. Best, Mackensen (talk) 17:37, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! Timrollpickering 19:22, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've gone and hacked away at Neville Chamberlain a bit -- cleared up some grammar issues. I still need to have a conversation with the word choices (there's a lot of "initially" and "whilst" showing up), but it's somewhat more streamlined now and I don't think I lost any important information. Since you listed it for peer review, I'd appreciate your input. Madame Sosostris 07:23, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Peers and categories

I've mass-reverted that anon who was re-catting peers. I think I've caught them all, and I see you warned him to stop. Mackensen (talk) 16:56, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

19th century UK general elections

Hey, I was wondering what you thought of articles like UK general election, 1852. It seems to me that in its current form, showing a Conservative victory, it is actually grossly misleading. But I have no sources to replace it with. Any thoughts? john k 22:54, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The only book I have to hand with any useful material is John Ramsden's An Appetite for Power on the Conservative Party since 1830 which has an appendix listing the number of Conservative MPs elected in each election since 1832 (broken down by nation). However for 1847 and 1852 it includes Peelites with protectionists, reflecting both the ambiguity of many individual MPs and also that there wasn't one day, or even month, in 1846 when the Conservative Party neatly separated itself into two unambiguous groups (unlike, say, Labour in August-September 1931). There's also a list of the popular vote since 1880.

Later this week I'll sit down and post the totals on each of the talk pages as a starter. There's possibly more in Robert Blake's The Conservative Party from Peel to Churchill/Thatcher/Major or in the 19th century volumes of the Longman history.

User:Dbiv is good at assembling statistics. His page goes back to 1885 but he may know some earlier sources. Timrollpickering 23:25, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I've tried to at least change the text on 1847 and 1852 to more accurate represent what was going on, but any refinement you can offer in that department would be helpful, as well. john k 00:24, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Robert Carr

Moved. would you like me to nominate you for adminship? john k 01:56, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That would be kind - yes thank you. Timrollpickering 15: 27, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've nominated you... see Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Timrollpickering. john k 19:06, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Gdansk/Vote diffs

Hi, and thanks for voting on Talk:Gdansk/Vote. I just checked all edits, and the software is sometimes acting funny. Could you check this diff to see if all votes are placed where you wanted them to, or if a vote was removed accidentially. If everything is fine, then never mind, and thanks for voting. Also, good luck with your Adminship! -- Chris 73 Talk 02:38, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

I think some got deleted by accident but I recast them. All the ones I've made so far are presently there. (I would have to give more thought to pre 1308 before voting there as it's not a period I know very much about.) Timrollpickering 12:14, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 00:33, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Template:Invalidtitle

Halló Timrollpickering! Please follow Misplaced Pages:Template:Invalidtitle. Best regards Gangleri | Th | T 17:40, 2005 Mar 6 (UTC)

Why?

I renamed the articles on the two current Reading constituencies, because I felt that I had made a mistake in naming them that way in the first place, as Reading X (constituency) is ambiguous (ie. what sort of constituency) especially when seen in a category list. I note that you have gone through and reversed my rename. You have done this without any explanation whatsoever. I'm left wondering if this was done for a reason, or was just vandalism that needs reverting. Please explain. -- Chris j wood 13:02, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I renamed them in line with all the other pages on parliamentary constituencies - I and others have moved other pages to bring consistency so that they are all in the same format - see Category:UK Parliamentary constituencies for all the ones that I am aware of.

(The duplication was a technical cock-up - the servers were slow last night and some stuff needed to be resubmitted - there is something that causes problems when only sections are edited and submitted. Unfortunately the computer I was using used the cached copy so did not show the error onscreen.)

Timrollpickering 13:31, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

election Template for MP articles?

I have been looking over the articles we have on the MPs in the last Parliament. These articles still describe the person as an MP even though Parliament has been dissolved for the election and there are no MPs @ present. What would you think about a template that makes this fact clear? The Template would be used from now until after the election and placed on WP:TFD after the vote. I am thinking of verbage like this:

This Misplaced Pages biography about MPs NAME was written while that person was a member of the British House of Commons. As Parliament was dissolved on April 11, 2005, there will be no Members of Parliament until after the general election on May 5.

I feel this would be good to alert newbies to UK Politics to this fact and stop confusion. I was thinking of a location like Template:NoMPge05 or somesuch.

Comments?

Hoshie/Crat 09:21, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the info on the Doctor Who pages

I have already left thank yous on the title contoversy page for DW. I just wanted to leave one here for the info that you added about the repeat transmission of the An Unearthly Child note that I put in today. It was interesting to learn that. Knowing that different BBC regions of the U.K. might have slight (or not so slight) differences from what was done in the London area I have wondered if this is where the 10 minute late start for the same episode, on November 23rd, story got its start. As in maybe only 85 seconds late in London but ten minutes late somewhere else. Have you ever heard anything about this? MarnetteD | Talk 22:40, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

My understanding (mainly from what I've read of people searching for the missing episodes) is that the BBC had the technology set-up even then for broadcasts to be relayed to their transmitters across the UK and that a UK wide transmission would come off a single source so it's unlikely there were variations in when a programme started. I guess the story originates in little more than misremembering and elaboration at a time when it wasn't possible to check a formal log. Timrollpickering 22:57, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Stanley Baldwin

Cheers for correcting my error in the Stanley Baldwin biography. I had read somewhere that he had lost in Kidderminster in 1906, but had wrongly assumed that he had been the incumbant... Good editing, keep it up! Vanky 21:52, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Paul Berry

Paul Berry article added. Gerry Lynch 21:23, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Categories: Parliamentary constituencies in...

What a mammoth task in splitting up these categories. It was a job that needed doing, without a doubt - well done. However I'm a bit concerned about the names you've chosen for the categories (I assume it was you -I havn't looked at them all). I wonder whether you need to include the name of the country concerned, ie England, Scotland etc. Just to say 'Parliamentary constituencies in the south-east' is a bit ambiguous, I think. I'd much rather see 'Parliamentary constituencies in south-east England' etc. Naturenet 19:13, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I suspect so - though with the size of things it may be best to assess each one individually. Using the formal name of the region was copied from the London category which had already been started - maybe we could add disambiguators on an individual case by case basis? Timrollpickering 20:38, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's such a big job I will respect whatever solution you - or anyone else who will take it on - sees fit. Just a suggestion, is all. Best wishes Naturenet 07:40, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Category:UK Wikipedians

Hi, just to let you know that the list of UK participants at the UK notice board was getting rather long, so I have replaced it with the above category. I was about to add it to your user page but saw that it is protected against editing, so I'll leave it to you to add yourself. -- Francs2000 | Talk 30 June 2005 21:13 (UTC)

Gerard Newe

I cannot understand your objection towards describing the appointment as belated, as I know you have some knowledge of Northern Ireland politics. It would be very difficult to argue that it was timely or prompt.

Lapsed Pacifist 13:29, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

It's bringing value judgements and opinions into what is already a highly controversial history. For a start one can't objectively judge the quality of Catholic Ulster Unionist MPs and Senators over the previous fifty years to say whether an earlier appointment was likely. The article should aim for Neutral Point Of View, not No Alternative Is Easily Arguable Point Of View. Timrollpickering 16:44, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Try and judge their quality. The list's not very long. It's also arguable whether the appointment was to improve relations or just a PR stunt, but perhaps that may be straying too far towards controversy.

Lapsed Pacifist 16:52, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Target:2006

Thanks for being the first to edit my first created page- I'm glad someone's paying attention! If you're right about Emirate Xaaron's first appearance (I'm sure you are, judging by the quality of your past edits!), could you follow up on the Emirate Xaaron page itself? The two pages now contradict each other. I would myself but my first annual was 1986, I don't have access to the 1985 to check the facts. Thanks for your help! Coyote-37 13:49, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Just updated it. The story And There Shall Come A Leader was also reprinted in one of the 1994 specials (along with the stories Wrath of Guardian and Wrath of Grimlock) but I don't think it's been in any of the recent Titan trade paperbacks. Timrollpickering 20:57, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Non-notable PPCs

As a response to the thread http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Charles_Christopher_Dundas , I have found these non-notable PPCs from other parties than Lib Dems (not any Conservative yet, though): Maggie Jones, Antonia Bance, Michael Tarrant, Helene Davies, Jim Killock, Tom Lines, Jacob Sanders and Tom Woodcock.--213.243.155.197 14:54, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

I have put up for VfD: Davies, Killock, Lines, Tarrant and Woodcock.

Sanders and Bance have survived previous VfDs but if you want to reinitiate them go ahead. Jones has served as Chair of the Labour Party and has a high profile so I wouldn't list her at this stage. Timrollpickering 20:52, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Page Redesign

I, Mollsmolyneux, have redesigned the List of incomplete Doctor Who serials page. To view it please Click Here. Please leave any comments you have about the page on My Talk Page and tell me if you think I should put the page on. -- Mollsmolyneux 12:51, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)

The Craig family

Thanks for correcting my silly faux pas in Irish Boundary Commission. By the way, that was an excellent point you made in Talk - pity that reality intervened! I suppose that Ireland couldn't bring themselves to reuse the term for constituency boundaries. --Red King 23:54, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

University of Kent Students' Union

An anonymous user contacted the Help Desk complaining of vandalism to this page. While I have removed the most obvious examples, I would welcome a knowledgeable eye to have another look at it. The bit about the duck warden at Keynes College appears suspicious to an outsider but I left it be because it might be a bit of local colour.

I would also be grateful if you could check the list of officeholders. The ones that I was able to check against the website seem OK but there are more officeholders listed than on the Union web page. Capitalistroadster 06:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

The Union webpage is badly designed with "Your Reps" just listing the sabbatical officers. "Part-Time Officers" list the rest.

The Duck Warden in Keynes College is true - see their website. Timrollpickering 11:26, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

wrong edit

Tim,

Your edit about the Queen's role in commissioning PMs was wrong. The monarch can either ask "can you form a government capable of surviving in the House of Commons?" or "Can you form a government capable of commanding a majority in the House of Commons?" The last time the latter question was asked was in 1940 off Churchill. The only other time it was asked was in 1916 off Lloyd George. (I think it was also asked of Bonar Law on that occasion, but he declined, allowing the King to ask Lloyd George). It has never been asked of a PM by the current queen.

In 1974 Heath initially declined to resign while he explored whether he could enter into a coalition with the Liberals. That was his choice; nothing to do with the Queen. When he failed, he resigned and the Queen asked Wilson "can you form a government capable of surviving in the House of Commons?" He said "yes" and did so. There was no controversy over the Queen's behaviour that time, merely Heath's delay in resigning. Your edit mixed up two completely different issues. FearÉIREANN\ 01:56, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Dorothy MacCardle

Hey,

Is Dorothy's book back in print? If it is it is great news. It does have errors in it but still is a fine history of the Irish Republic from an anti-Treaty perspective. I've a copy from 1967 here somewhere (in my very untidy office!). FearÉIREANN\ 00:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I saw it in W.H.Smiths in Belfast at the start of the month and it looked a newish edition. The ISBN is from Amazon.co.uk Timrollpickering 01:06, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Alumni?

David C. Lane was not alumni of the University of London. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 21:24, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

My mistake - it should have been a lecturer (or whatever term is settled on for the categories). Timrollpickering 00:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Leader of the Opposition (UK)

I've changed this article in the manner we discussed nearly a year ago, separating out leaders of the opposition in the commons from those in the lords. Anyway, I've tried to make up the list as best I can, but there are some holes, and some guesswork, so I'd appreciate it if you'd look it over and make any corrections that need to be made, and note any more complicated issues for discussion on the talk page. Thanks! john k 19:03, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Michael Meadowcroft

I have just created an article on Michael Meadowcroft. Additions and edits are welcome. Ground Zero | t 16:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Lib Dem Leadership election

Cheers Tim for the help and updates on what could be a busy page and/or a magnet for vandals. Here's hoping for a decent article at the end of all this! doktorb | words 20:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Eileenbell.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Eileenbell.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Misplaced Pages because of copyright law (see Misplaced Pages's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Misplaced Pages are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. -- Longhair 11:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Frederic Herbert Maugham

Just to inform you I have redirected Frederick Herbert Maugham to Frederic - his birth name and by what he was titled when he was called Lord Chancellor. I am in the process of adjusting all redirects but thought it probably impolite to adjust your user page. (It is a good article by the way) References are included in the article you have commenced. VirtualSteve 11:27, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Possible Student Government Vanity Edits?

I have noticed that a user, User:Boxendine, has been making a large number of edits to articles about student government, particularly in relation to the USA, including the following articles:

The last two are the dead giveaways here - the username seems to be a contraction of Butch Oxendine. The magazines and even the Association above all appear to be owned by Mr Oxendine. I am unaware of correct procedures in these instances - he seems to be going in for a lot of autobiography and self publicity, which feels inappropriate for wikipedia. I though I would bring this to you since you're an admin and I know you've expressed an interest in this area in the past. Regards, Jamse 10:28, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Francie Molloy - Sinn Fein

Francie Molloy was elected to the Sinn Fein Ard Comhairle at the Ard Fheis, at the weekend so that would indicate the suspension is lifted.--Padraig3uk 20:03, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Bad manners

Imagine someone had a userbox like yours for the EU for other unions like the US, the UK, the United Arab Emirates. It is just bad manners. ROGNNTUDJUU! 20:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

UUP Leadership elections

I'm really bad at remembering to log in when editing pages! I put the bit in about there being a UUP leaderhsip election every year on the 1995 and 2000 election pages. Are you aware that there was an election in 2004? Burnside proxy self confessed stalkinghorse whose name escapes me and Robert Oliver both contested it on different banners and both combined got less than 50% of the vote. i don't have the voting figures or anything which is why I mention it here.Traditional unionist 20:36, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't remember this one at all - is there any media coverage of this available? Timrollpickering 20:46, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure, this is why I bring it up. His name was David something or other from East Londonderry. I'll look up the BBC website now.Traditional unionist 20:49, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

That was easier than i thought - david hoey - Traditional unionist 20:50, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

You're right, that one rather slipped everyone's notice! Fancy a shot at creating Ulster Unionist Party leadership election, 2004?

I remember mostly because I was there! Was rather an exciting meeting actually. I'll do it tomorrow when I have time to do the maths.Traditional unionist 21:04, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

infact there's the maths! i'll do it tomorrow anyway.Traditional unionist 21:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Ulster Unionist Party leadership election, 1995, i guess thats aimed at you as anyone elseTraditional unionist 23:35, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

100,000 BC vs. An Unearthly Child — again

Hey, Tim. The ever-vexing question of what the article about the first Doctor Who serial should be called has come up again at Talk:100,000 BC (Doctor Who). It seems Andrew Pixley is less dogmatic on the subject than we all thought, and in light of that Terence has said he's willing to go along with a move to An Unearthly Child. You're the only other person who expressed a strong preference for 100,000 BC; if you're OK with the move, we have a real consensus. Your input either way would be welcome. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:21, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Liberal Democrats leadership election, 2006

Hi Tim. Just letting you know that I have listed the LibDem leadership election article for peer review. Cheers. —Wh o uk (talk) 20:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Peter Weir

I'm unsure of the accuracy of the Peter Weir (politician) article. Anti agreement members were barred from standing for the 1998 Assembly Election by the UUP wern't they? Thus Weir would have been Burnside esque - supportive at first then anti. Do you know?Traditional unionist 21:25, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure (for that matter was Burnside really pro Agreement and shouting about it in 1998?) but didn't the UUP actually invoke the "no MPs standing" for all bar Trimble and Taylor to keep Donaldson out, rather than an explicit central bar on anti-agreement candidates? Would the UUP structure at the time have even allowed such a ban? Timrollpickering 18:16, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

That did occur to me while writing the above, but I had always assumed that that is why Dennis Watson hadn't stood as a UUP candidate, he was certainly a UUP member at the time. My impression was that all 28 elected, and indeed all candidats were pledged pro agreement.Traditional unionist 20:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Glancing through Dean Godson's Himself Alone the only points I can spot are that Donaldson's potential candidature was vetoed by the UUP Executive refusing to grant a waiver to the rule against dual candidatures (number 21). Arlene Foster sought selection in Fermanagh and South Tyrone but was not selected by her "local association" (page 365) suggesting the decision was taken on a constituency association basis rather than from the centre. Timrollpickering 21:24, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Which begs the question why did Armatiage and Weir support Trimble for FM the first time? But I guess thats a subjective political point. So you reckon that they anti's were not barred from standing?Traditional unionist 23:56, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Would the party rules at the time even have allowed it? Godson's book several times covers on the ultra autonomy of the local UUP branches (right down to some refusing the central party literature in elections, making it a nightmare to get a coherent message out) and the weak constitutional position the leader held within the party. I reckon minor anti-figures were allowed but the big names who wanted to run for the Assembly (i.e. Donaldson and perhaps Smyth - Ross was totally against any involvement) were blocked on technicalities. Timrollpickering 22:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

That would make sense. The new Party constitution doesn't give the leader much more control actually! But that will change this year I'd have thought.Traditional unionist 22:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Fermanagh and South Tyrone

Hi, Thanks for for reverting my edits. I thought I was on the Mid Ulster page. My mistake. Best. --Damac 16:48, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Ervine

Your question; being unable to find your email address, I'll say email mjohns2005-4@yahoo.co.uk and I'll tell you what I think!

Your recent NUS edits

Your edits to the NUS marking contoversy have on the one hand provided a much improved factual background context to my original unpolished contribution, but have on the other had included some dubious edits.

You appear to delete anything that you do not like by calling it "POV". You appear to misunderstand this policy. The idea is not that no part of an article can represent a point of view, it is that an article should represent all points of view.

If I may quote from Misplaced Pages:Tutorial (Keep in mind): Misplaced Pages's editorial policy is the "neutral point of view," often abbreviated "NPOV." This policy says that we accept all the significant viewpoints on an issue. Instead of simply stating one perspective, we try to present all relevant viewpoints without judging which is correct. Our aim is to be informative, not persuasive.

Equally Misplaced Pages:Five pillars states: Sometimes this requires representing multiple points of view; presenting each point of view accurately; providing context for any given point of view, so that readers understand whose view the point represents;

I particularly draw your attention to the words "providing context for any given point of view": I have done this for instance with the Ganesh quote, and with mentioning Kat Fletcher's marxist background but you have deleted both, again. This is not reasonable. Both are very clearly relevant on a page about the NUS.

If points do not fit perfectly under the given section title, and you have to slightly change the section title, do so, but this is no justification for deletion of material relevant to the page subject.

As far as deletion goes, I draw your attention to rule number 10 of the Misplaced Pages:Simplified Ruleset:

10. Particularly, don't revert good faith edits.

Note the word "particularly". You are far to keen to delete. Readers can judge the quality of given arguments, but not if you delete them.

Now from your point of view as an elected representative of a large student union, you may not like the idea that there is criticism of the NUS. If you feel anyting I argue with is unreasonable, you should try to argue against it. If you can, you need not delete, if you can't, you should not delete.

Questions raised by an issue are not a point of view, though answers may be. Again if you can argue them, do so, if not, you should not delete.

Your edit to NUS 19:40, 27 May 2006 included a deletion on the grounds that the text "belongs in a polemic or analysis, not an encyclopedia". Your apparent assertion that an encyclopedia is no place for analysis is frankly bizzare. Furthermore, a neutral point of view, I remind you, is acheived by representing all points of view (which if presented alone might be "polemic") not by deletion of some points of view.

I notice you changed "The National Union of Students (NUS) is the main organisation claiming to represent students' unions in..." back to "The National Union of Students (NUS) is the main representative body for the students' unions ..." To say that it claims to represent is a fact. To say that it is representative is an opinion. It seems you are the one not being neutral here. If by "representative body for" you mean "a federation of" then say that, don't use the a word with an idea of representation which under the circumstances is under question.

Finally, whether or not I choose to use a login is irrelevant, and does not justify either deletions or labelling as POV.

129.12.200.49 14:09, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

First off your lack of a login is irrelevant to whether or not your edits are POV, but it doesn't provide certainty when you are posting with an IP that has been banned several times for vandalism.

Also the better place to discuss this is Talk:National Union of Students of the United Kingdom so I'm moving comments to there. Timrollpickering 14:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Northern Ireland Assembly, 1982

I've just created an article on this but can't get the results table to work. Any help with that and with the rest of the article would be appreciated. Valenciano 10:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Afd

I've nominated Shasha Khan for deletion as a non-notable candidate following your Ben Abbots nomination..

Cheers

doktorb _words 09:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

And Steven Brooks (UK politician) too if I have the spelling right...Er, I knew Nigel Farage was not the leader, I always call him that in refering to him and have to go back to correct it later, one of those misunderstandings I can't get my brain to correct =) =D. The anon complainent could be a soft-vandal, I've looked at the contribs and there's somethings of question there...But anyway, yeah, seems just more silliness from the trolls. doktorb _words 11:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Are councillors notable?

Knowing your interest in losing parliamentary candidates, you may be interested in the current Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Tom Weiss who hasn't even stood for parliament buy where the creator is claiming notability as a councillor alone (and some book). Mtiedemann 15:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Councillors for AfD

I see you've been on the search for AfD candidates. If you have time, there's a rich source at Category:Councillors in Kettering, Category:Brentwood councillors, Category:Councillors in Manchester, Category:Councillors in Liverpool. There is a group of Lords Mayor of Colchester at Category:Councillors in the East of England too. I haven't had time to set up the multiple AfDs so far and had hoped the Template:notability tag would alert someone. It hasn't. I'll get round to them at some point, though. Martín (saying/doing) 14:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Good work on listing these, but I do wish you'd bundled them together. Save the grief of saying "delete" against each article, if one isn't notable, then none of them are. --Richhoncho 14:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

One has been voted keep so far because they're the council leader, which is a fair argument. I'm reluctant to bundle together when there may be individual notablity currently hidden - sometimes a VfD can actually bring this stuff out. Timrollpickering 14:56, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I see your point, but I'd say bundling them doesn't prevent people voting to keep individual members of the bundle, just makes it easier to handle on the AFD page. Yomangani 15:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Alliancemlas2003.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alliancemlas2003.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages'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:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 10:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

QMC

Cool! --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 08:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

just joined that category. I feel like more of a Warwick student but I guess that's where I am now. Triangle e 22:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Conservative or Unionist party tags in Scotland

Just added this discussion to the Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject UK Parliament constituencies page. Any input from yourself would be greaty appreciated. Thanks. Galloglass 12:11, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Friends (TV series)

Thanks for reverting the move of this article! ~~ Peteb16 23:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

James Pybus

Hi Tim, I just stumbled across the very stubby article which you had created on James Pybus.

May ask you to take a look at my comments at Talk:Percy_John_Pybus#James_or_Percy? Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl 00:16, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Responding there now. Timrollpickering 01:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

CAT

		The Original Barnstar
		I Prince of Dharma award you Timrollpickering this barnstar for doing great work in catagorizing articles keep up the good work!

Redirects with possibilities

At Derek Birley, you bypassed 2 redirects with possibilities diff. I have two concerns with this:

There is a guideline not to bypass redirects unless you edit the page for another reason, as redirects have a negligible server load compared to edits
More importantly, the {{R with possibilities}} tag explicitly says "Do not replace these redirected links with a link directly to the target page"

Please check the purpose of redirects before you bypass them. I have reverted your edit to Derek Birley. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I have noticed that you are working hard on numerous education articles, and the above is a minor oversight. Keep it up! --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Category:People by university in Northern Ireland

I am not stalking you (honest) but I disagree with this category. It requires users to load an extra page for no benefit, so I put it up for deletion. Nothing personal. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Glasgow constituencies

Hello

You seem to be an expert in such matters so perhaps you can help me clarify a point: while translating the article Donald Dewar for the French wiki, I tried to check the names of the constituencies he stood for, and could not match them with the list in the article List of United Kingdom Parliament constituencies. It turns out the devolution played havoc with the list, Glasgow Garscadden, for example, totally disappearing while Glasgow Anniesland seems to be a recent creation. Apparently some (or all?) constituencies in Scotland were replaced by new ones, but for the non-British reader it is unclear whether United Kingdom parliament constituencies match Scotland's parliament constituencies or whether the two lists are different. Information exists here and there if you use the links, but you can find it only if you know about it in advance. I wish I could think of a synthetic, elegant solution to the problem, but I can't. However it seems to me that a few footnotes (by an expert) might be helpful for non-British readers. Amicalement, --Anne97432 23:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

You're right it is confusing.

Every so often the Boundary Commission reviews the size and shape of the constituencies across the UK and often recommends changes to both the area covered and the names. This can be particularly confusing in an urban area where over decades the balance of the population shifts, and so consequently a lot of name changes happen.

Complicating matters further when the Scottish Parliament was established it used the same constituencies as were used at the time for the UK Parliament (with the exception of Orkney & Shetland which was split in two). However a decision was made that the boundaries don't have to stay the same as the UK ones (mainly to prevent a cut in Members of the Scottish Parliament at the same time as the UK MPs) and so the Scottish Parliament still uses the old constituency boundaries, whilst the UK Parliament uses new ones.

At the time of Dewar's death Glasgow Anniesland had the same boundaries for both the UK (where it's since been replaced) and Scotland (where it's been retained).

Does that explain it as a starting point? Timrollpickering 00:19, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you ! (Tentatively) Er - yes, it does. At least for me because I'm really interested. The point, however, would be to add one line in the articles Scottish parliament and UK parliament, perhaps with a link to both revised lists of constituencies, so newcomers would be made aware of the change. Which is something I don't feel qualified to do, notwithstanding wikipedia's free for all policies. ;) --Anne97432 07:51, 29 October 2006 (UTC

Third oldest university article

Hi I just noticed your new article on the third oldest university debate via the UCL discussion. Just to say good work, I found it enlightening to get a summary of all the universities claims. I personally think UCL was the first even though it didnt get its royal charter till later. Heres a barnstar for your great contribution efforts to WP. LordHarris 13:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

Spartacus Encyclopedia

Recently a user on Misplaced Pages decribed Spartacus as a "crappy" encyclopedia that was heavily biased. Spartacus has information in it that sheds certain American agencies in a possible bad light. I have seen other sharp critisism from what it appears to be of American origin implying that we should not use the material in Spartacus unless it is supported by an American encyclopedia or government agency.

Now there seems to be a reluctance to cite Spartacus in this subject area where the English encyclopedia was criticized.

Outside of the United States, is there any reputation that Spartacus is an unreliable source and not suitable for Misplaced Pages? RPJ 03:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

KCL

Hi. I notice you've altered several historical references to "King's College, London" to "King's College London". This is anachronistic, since the comma was used until fairly recently. A modern corporate identity name change shouldn't be backdated. -- Necrothesp 23:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Alumnus/a revert

Hi there. I'm very sorry but you wrote in your revert that my change from alumnus to alumnus/a was NOT discussed on the talk page. THIS IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT. It isn't MY fault that you are not a thorough wikipedian, my friend. I put a full two paragraph discussion of my logic on the talk page. Go look there. I think your revert was counterproductive, counterintuitive, and illogical. Please see my comments on the alumnus talk page AND see in the actual article my CITED information that i added under usage proving that this IS a correct usage. Please respond on the alumnus talk page or on mine. I did my part by clearly explaining the reasoning for the revert on the talk page and responsibly making sure there were no double redirects etc. Please do yours. Thank you very much. Nadsat 19:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

The "discussion" was buried in a thread two and a half years ago, in a position where it was very difficult to spot. It certainly wasn't in any way prominent - and especially it wasn't anywhere near the section headed "The Recent Move" which was the last item on the talk page. Also it was hardly a discussion but a suggestion made late one night and then a move made in the small hours the next day without other contributions. Furthermore umpteen discussions have strongly deplored article names in a compound form that no-one uses. That is "counterproductive, counterintuitive, and illogical" (as is resorting to abuse as a substitute for argument). Can you point to another article that uses this style to create an artificial title? Timrollpickering 20:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I didn't realize I should make a new discussion about it, apologies for that. YET, if you were thorough, you would have seen on my explanation of my edit I wrote "m (moved Alumnus to Alumnus/a: removing sexist language - see my comment on the talk page about it)" - So I instructed you to look on the talk page for my comments. Also, I am not sure if the "compound form" is used on any other pages, I will research that but it may take me awhile to gather a list, but this is almost a moot point anyway (*explanation in following sentences for this conclusion). Also typically the masculine forms and feminine forms have their own pages. "Man" has a page that refers to people with male gonads and "woman" refers to people with female gonads. Etc. Also, just because the majority of wikipedia has uncited material and material with no sources doesn't mean we should follow that trend. I think there is a strong case to be made that the use of the term "alumnus" for a page that talks about alumna and alumnae is illogical and not a good idea, just like uncited information. I believe this analogy makes sense because it illustrates that just because one circumstance is more prevalent, does not mean this circumstance is the right circumstance, that it should occur, or that we should be assume culpability for making it reoccur. Also, please see the alumnus article and the ONLY REFERENCE on the page which I added when I added the information and follow the link for the dicussion on the usage of alumnae/i and alumnus/a. Feel free to visit these links I found within seconds of using Google. For uses of alumnus/a: , , , AND for uses of alumni/ae: , , ,. These are just a few. Many of these links are from presitgious Ivy League colleges, instituations and nationally acclaimed boarding schools. Look, it's a compromise anyway - and a valid one at that. I could say use "alumna" as the title but that would be "counterproductive, counterintuitive, and illogical" as well. Even the a is just a "/a" here. Really, "alumnus/a" and "alumni/ae" are well established and respected. As I urged you before pick up a MLA Style Manual and check out what they deem "removing sexist language." I see no need to call it sexist (personally) or point fingers, language has faults, and they have been fixed. In the academic world and grammatical circles this usage is really preferred. Hope to hear from you soon. PS. (I don't want my tone to sound mean, I don't mean to be rude for the sake of being rude - just passionately logical, please read it as such). Nadsat 21:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, in case I didn't make it clear in my previous post - the above links should illustrate that the forms alumnus/a and alumni/ae (or alumna/us and alumnae/i) are not only used, but used quite frequently, since in your explanation of your revert of my edit, you stated that the form I used (alumnus/a) is not used, which is obviously incorrect. Nadsat 01:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Apostrophes and Quotes

You don’t like typographically correct apostrophes (’) and quotes (“”) or why do you remove them from articles as in ? Please don’t do that again. Thanks. — Richie 17:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I note that some of your own comments on your own talk page use them. Across Misplaced Pages the standard keyboard forms are far more in use, not least because they're much easier to type but also because the unicode problems make the others bad form for article titles. Look for example at (to take a random page on my watchlist) Hancock's Half Hour which consistently uses ' rather than ’ in an article with a lot of apostrophes in it. Timrollpickering 18:25, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I do not claim that I exclusively use typographically correct quotes and apostrophes. As you mentioned, the plain – but typographically wrong – characters are easier to type and do for discussions on talk pages. However, I think that articles deserve more attention to typography. And replacing typographic quotes by dumb quotes (as they're know as well) is definitely not easier than just leaving them in the article. — Richie 11:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

That's your opinion but not policy. Cleaning the article when other changes are being made is a useful time to tidy them. Is there any Misplaced Pages policy on this? Timrollpickering 11:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Please refer to Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style#Punctuation where typographically correct quotation marks are used. Thanks. — Richie 16:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Which states there is no policy to always use typographic quotes and that either form is acceptable. Timrollpickering 16:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

That’s cool, I didn’t know that. As I obviously didn’t even read the Manual of Style, I’d like to apologise for all this fuss. Have a nice day. — Richie 10:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Anthony Giddens, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Misplaced Pages's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.

Crest of Queen Mary, University of London

Appologies for the delay in getting back, have been away for a while. I can't seem to find where i got the image from, and searches on google etc show nothing so it might have been from a back issue of the article on QMCUL, so it might be best to delete it and replace it with the current logo. AlexD 20:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Current reckoning on Talk:Queen Mary, University of London reckons that it's a pre merger crest (and comparing it to the current crest it's easy to see elements that were carried forward). Maybe it's best to leave it where it is for potential use with the QMUL history is expanded. Timrollpickering 21:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Is there a category for "boring and repetitious?"

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For work as an admin on CfD; that job I'm sure doesn't not suck. Thank you for the tedious and yet excellent work you have done. —Scouter Sig 07:40, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Close of Cfd for Joey (TV series)

With only 5 people commenting, 2 for deletion and 3 for keeping, and there being no stated consensus of those 5 people, I think this would be better called a "No consensus (keep)". I'm concerned about this because categories such as these are clearly often deleted and the entire class of poorly populated eponymous categories is currently under discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Overcategorization. Personally, I inadvertantly missed the Joey discussion, and would have strongly voted to delete, as it seems pointless to keep. Considering our guidelines for categorzation, the low turn out, and the ongoing discussions, I'm wondering if I can convince you to change it to a "No consensus". Thanks. -- Samuel Wantman 21:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

It's a tricky one but when the only people voting to delete are the proposer and one other, whilst more people are voting to keep, I'm inclined towards "keep" rather than "no consensus" - the proposer aside something like 75% were for keeping. It's always going to be a close call when not that many people are commenting at all but one has to make a judgement on what is there as to what is the most likely and in such circumstances "keep" is closest. I'd be reluctant to change the closure myself though it can be reviewed by others.

Also if there wider discussions on over categorisation then it may be preferable to seek some suggestive directions and mass nominate similar (in this case TV show categories) to get a broader outcome rather than a one by process. Timrollpickering 23:06, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

A flurry of CFD activity

Wow, thanks for all of the help over there. I was away for the holidays and it looks like a significant backlog accumulated in my absence. Luckily, Cydebot is making short work of that. --Cyde Weys 01:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.