Mais oui!

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10

Bioproject

I see what you're doing in the bio project. Should we use the Medieval Scotland project page to list and organize characters related to medieval Scotland in order of importance? BTW, you might like to know of the existence of Template:Scotland-hist-stub Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, started it off: Wikipedia:WikiProject Medieval Scotland/BioProject. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Discussion on CFD

Hi Mais, thanks for the reminder. I saw the nomination had beeen withdrawn last week so didn't do anything. I've now commented and think this is a good example where dual categorisation makes sense, and is also a good compromise. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I'll take the reference to a "heavyweight" Wikipedian as a compliment, not a reference to my sadly expanding waistline :-), although I have never really regarded myself in such lofty terms around here. We all go about our business doing what we do for the best of the project, but thanks anyway. As for numpties and daft brushes, well from what I've seen that's way off the mark. "Stubborn bugger" might be closer, but the dual cat agreement you struck with BrownHairedGirl was an excellent compromise IMO, and may properly blow that particular description out of the water now. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I tried to read the discussion but, to be honest, I think any vote of mine would be based on a rushed analysis of the situation and I'd rather not vote on something so important without clearly having an understanding of the issue , and an orientation towards one of the "sides." Sorry. Nach0king 18:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Long term abuse#Banned User:Irate

I feel your comments here were disingenuous to the historic counties cause. Far from promoting our "agenda", all we seek is for Wikipedia to reflect a NPOV that aknowledges the reality of the historic counties as separate entities from local government, as stated by Her Majesty's Government and "County Councils" themselves on several occasions. As a Scot, why do you have any interest in county boundaries south of the border anyway? In Scotland I believe you have the fortunate situation, as in Northern Ireland, whereby Counties and local government divisions are widely regarded as separate entities. How would you feel if people tried to tell you that "Scottish Borders" was a county? Yorkshire Phoenix (talk • contribs) 08:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply

I'm trying to stay out of the issue at the moment. I note this is the section of policy that is relevant in this case : "views that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented except in articles devoted to those views" - for example, we wouldn't mention the fact that some people believe dinosaur bones were created by god in 4000 BC on every article about a dinosaur fossil. Articles about geography should be about geography: geographic revisionism movements can be perfectly well covered in articles about geographic revisionism movements.

Have you seen Template:Yorkshire and Template:Lancashire? Morwen - Talk 09:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I think that'd be original research ;) It is a form of historical revisionism though, as they have come along after the fact and retroactively invented new entities : everyone back in 1889 was perfectly clear that the County of London was a proper, first-class county : contemporary sources show this quite well.

The term administrative county appears to have only invented as a way of saying for example "administrative county of Lancaster": "Lancashire excluding all the county boroughs", contrasting with the term "county of Lancaster" which meant "Lancashire including all the county boroughs, including the southern part of Warrington and suchforth". In Scotland, where this wasn't needed, the terminology wasn't adopted.

Later, in the 1960s or 1970s, groups were set up by people resenting the Local Government Act 1972 etc, reacting against reform in their area, and therefore promoting the idea of "traditional counties", which they soon found had been tampered with over the preceding years. So they then did research and synthesised, then, a unified set of "traditional" counties with an arbritrary cut-off point differing on whom you speak to. I'd be very surprised if the idea of a still-existing set of N traditional counties, ignoring any boundary changes since the 19th century, predates 1965 (can we find any statements that "Caversham is really in Oxfordshire" before then, for example?) And of course governments were giving statements on the issue, once it had arisen: it's a quick way to shut people up: how can legislation affect the existence of a supposed set of "traditional counties" when the idea of "traditional counties" was invented in the 1960s/1970s by some activists? The statements, when closely examined, are all very carefully worded, but almost non-sequiturs once you realise this.

Of course none of this is documented (for entirely sensible reasons: the youth of the movement would rather undermine their argument of continuity) Morwen - Talk 10:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

RSPCA reversion 25th June - response please

Hello again - I find it perturbing that you have not replied to my messages. I have posted another message on Talk:Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. I would appreciate a response, either on that page or on my own talk page User talk:Ballista. Thanks - Ballista 09:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for rapid response. See [[1]] and look at your 25th June edit. I am asking why such a total reversion occurred, without discussion. Previous messages can be found in your User talk:Mais oui!/Archive8, headed 'reversion' (item No 28). - Ballista 10:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

OK thanks - please go to the RSPCA discussion page again, to see some references, although I didn't consider them necessary at the time, as the potential for conflict of interest, in each case, was painfully clear without. - Ballista 10:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC) PS sorry, obviously omitted to hit 'save page' button & I lost them, in my haste to respond to new message. I'll go back and rework it. Please allow 5 mins - Ballista 10:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Wekepedians

Just FYI:

• Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 August 1#Category:Wekepedians
• Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Wekepedians' notice board

You'd be best to stay well clear, just leave Mallimak to continue digging their own hole. /wangi 08:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Biography WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of biographies.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Starting some new articles? Our article structure tips outlines some things to include.
• Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every biography article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! plange 15:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Ouch

This should probably be redacted. Even if you're 100% correct, the tone is just wrong, and doesn't make you look too good. As you don't know me from a bar of soap, I will take it not amiss if you ignore this unasked for advice. - brenneman ^{L} 08:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

redact = "frame: formulate in a particular style or language; "I wouldn't put it that way"; "She cast her request in very polite language".

On a scale of 1 to 10, my diplomacy skills are about 2. I am very, very pissed off, and quite frankly I have not got the skills to say what I want to say in flowery language. Given this, I have just deleted the whole damn thing. If she is ever going to apologise, then she will do it anyway, without any flowery request for one from me. --Mais oui! 08:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, there is something to be said for knowing when to just erase something you've said. I've only very recently progressed from that skill to knowing when not to say it in the first place. - brenneman ^{L} 08:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

You are clearly higher up The Ten Bhumi than my good self. I may, one day, reach that state of blissful being where I can just keep my mouth shut. Don't hold your breath. --Mais oui! 08:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Chomp !!

This might keep you from saying the wrong thing at the wrong time :-) BTW, I removed you from Category:British female MPs and commented on the whole shebang. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 09:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Chomp, chomp, thanks for the cookie, although it will destroy my lovely figure. Wow, for a few hours there I had managed to both switch gender and get elected to the Westminster parliament. How thrilling. --Mais oui! 08:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Irate

There is no way in the world that User:Irate should be unblocked. He was banned permanently by Jimbo Wales himself, for his bad attitude and his refusal to follow the rules. This was nothing to do with his edits to county articles: it happened before he ever went near them. Read this for to be enlightened (this was one of his sockpuppets). --RFBailey 08:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Mmmm... OK. I did not know the back-story. It was just a suggestion, but clearly not a very good one. --Mais oui! 08:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

RE:Wallace

Oh, sorry for disrupting this. I just edited the way I felt was right. I won't remove it then, although I don't see why Henry II should go, as I already cut the list. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, sorry again. I don't Cromwell should be there either. Look how many English rulers are already there. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

When it comes to political leaders, obviously English leaders will top because England has always been stronger and more able to project power and influence on a wider stage. I'm trying to think of a candidate, but it's tough; maybe James I of England? Sorry, that's the best I can do ATM; I'll give it a thought. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 13:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

What about Columba? Founder of Iona (light of western Europe), converter of the northern Picts, true apostle of Scotland, etc? If we got the Scottish and Irish users behind him, then Columba could be possible. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 09:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd rather see less euroamerocentrism, i.e. more variety on the list. Where are Chandragupta Maurya, the First Emperor, the Hongwu Emperor and Suleiman the Magnificent I ask myself ? The usual pathetic effort I'm sorry to say. I'm off to be bold ! Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Stupid categorisation ! Well, Hongwu I need to add. Bastards ! Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

In 20 years time the boot will be on the other foot, so we may as well get used to a greater emphasis on Asian figures. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Biography Newsletter August 2006

The August 2006 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. plange 01:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

An automated message from Werdnabot

Hi there, I tried to archive your user talk page, but it seems that you have an error in your Werdnabot directive that prevented me from correctly archiving your User talk page. Please review this error, or contact Werdna648 for assistance. Werdnabot ^(DNBF)/_T\^C 20:02, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Scotland

I'd be up for that. --Guinnog 20:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Colorado Springs Cricket Club

Thanks for creating this stub.

I'm an active member of this club and would be happy to fill in the details.

Abhay Natu

Scotland

Eh, I woke up half an hour ago to a glowing article about How Wonderful, The Fringe Is Back!, so I'm just being cranky and reactionary ;-) Feel free to revert my changes, I won't fight over them; just a gut feeling stylistically that it didn't improve anything. Shimgray | talk | 13:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Reference for Allan Wilson (MSP)

I put the reference you ask for on my talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Allan_Wilson_MSP.

All the gory details are there, (I tend to be a bit "wordy" at times, sorry about that)

After having a look at that which should verify the "football" issue, can we say, simply;

He is married, has two sons, and lives in Kilbirnie. In his free time he is a keen footballer and was appointed chairman of the Kilbirnie Community Football Club committee by the Scottish Football Association.

We would be quite happy with that and could move on to adding "meat" to the article (should we dare).

On that note, see you have added some links, that is great. There is one more that can be added to complete the linking process. (sorry, can't do it myself, rules you know, rules rules rules, ba humbug)

On the line In October 2004 he was appointed Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning. There is a link to an article for "Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deputy_Minister_for_Enterprise_and_Lifelong_Learning

By the way, on a scale of 1 to 10, my diplomacy skill is about 1, welcome to the club. I get pissed off as well though not at you. It is comforting to know I am not alone. I like your style. (fancy a job in the Parliament?)

Allan Wilson MSP 14:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

University of Edinburgh

Why have you restored the massive duplication of the history section?– Smyth\^talk 16:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

And what in the manual of style mandates that awkward first sentence for the alumni article? – Smyth\^talk 16:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

The first time the article mentions the title, put it in bold using three apostrophes — '''article title''' produces article title. For example: "This Manual of Style is a style guide."

As a general rule, do not put links in

• the bold reiteration of the title in the article's lead sentence or
• any section title.

In future, please read the document referred to before queying it. That section is right at the beginning, so you could have found it easily yourself. --Mais oui! 16:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologise, I had looked at Wikipedia:Lead section, which is something of a duplicate. However, I still think "avoid banality" is the most important rule in that section. The repeated text looks ridiculous and unprofessional. – Smyth\^talk 18:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Please respond. – Smyth\^talk 08:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

RE: Sorry

I wouldn't consider myself a newbie as such (4000+ edits), I've just never nominated anything for deletion before (least of all a category). No hard feelings though. -- Steel 17:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:inventions

I doubt Scotland's inventions do modern Scotland any good. Being ruled by another country kinda prevents that. Anyways, yeah, I'll try and fix the history section. There are great images on the Picts on wiki now, may wanna use the Hilton of Cadboll Stone image. What d'ya think? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 19:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey they do it for me too. :) BTW, I'm preparing an article on David I at User:Calgacus/David_I.. It should be clean and ready in a few days. Hope to get it to FA stage in time for 1.0. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Non notable club

What do you reckon about the aricle 130th Glasgow Company, The Boys' Brigade? Deletion material? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 12:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Agree. I bunged up the {{db-club}} template. --Mais oui! 12:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

MPs by Parliament

I have made a suggestion for how to categorise MPs by Parliament: see Category talk:British_MPs#MPs_by_Parliament, and would welcome your comments. --BrownHairedGirl 21:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Welsh

Thanks for the (minor) barnstar! I have to say, the Wales vs Welsh people issue is a tricky one. The line between ethnicity and nationality is sometimes quite confusing. My rule of thumb is that Wales is the correct destination, unless particular reference is being made to someone's ethnic background. Are you familiar with WP:DPL? Perhaps you could bring up your concerns there, I'd certainly support you. Soo 10:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Storer Clouston

Weirdly, it looks as if I changed some of your categorisation in my last edit, but I didn't! I will try to fix it and hope you won't need to tidy up after me. I can't understand what happened. --HJMG 16:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Have got cats back to the way you left them now. (I just don't like it when I click 'save page' and unpredictable stuff happens.) --HJMG 16:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Cumberland/Cumbernauld!! No comment - or I'll say something cynical. --HJMG 17:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandal

The user "Yorkshire Phoenix" is going round articles, changing home countries to just UK and you only have to look at their user page to see they are here to push their own POV. What can be done about someone like this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yorkshire_Phoenix_%28194.203.110.127%29—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.207.205.85 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 10 August 2006.

East Riding of Yorkshire

Hi. Can you please explain your reversion here? I put a lot of hard work into for example researching for example the geology of the area and its coastline and don't understand how "WP:NPA; Yorkshire is in England" is supposed to explain such a reversion. Where am I have supposed to made personal attacks? Morwen - Talk 12:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, if it was by Irate then the edit did indeed need reverting because he is hard-banned. The edit comment was entirely inappropriate, of course. I've not really looked into the start of this. I never got back to you about your message regarding Irate, but he you'd do well to wash your hands of him: he is not going to be a useful ally. Morwen - Talk 12:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and your description of the change from "England" -> "United Kingdom" as vandalism is no more acceptable than his description of your change the other way as vandalism. It's a perfectly legitimate Content_dispute and nobody is vandalising the article. Morwen - Talk 12:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for help on British

Thanks for your recent edits on British. That page was not fun to clean up, and I really liked the clarifications you made there. Keep up the good wiki-work! - grubber 17:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:Traditional

Because it's clear that some of the first monarchs there were actually Kings of the Picts, rather than Kings of Scots. "Late Pictland" and "early Scotland" were essentially the same kingdoms. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

No, the list as a whole is "traditional". The alternative is to get rid of the distinction between "Scottish" and "Pictish" monarchs. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 22:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Orphan Aberdeenshire logo

Hi, I noticed you tagged Image:Gen aberdeenshire logo.gif as not orphan, pointing to Aberdeenshire, but as far as I can see, the image is not being used in that article (only a .png version of it is used)...? --Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 10:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandal at it again

I see this idiot, is still trying to get rid of any references to England:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brampton&action=history

Can't you get banned for reverting more than 3 times within a 24 hour period?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.207.20.156 (talk • contribs) 12:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I attempted a compromise after your first revert and view your subsequent reverts away from the recognised NUTS 1 subdivisions as vandalism, therefore WP:3RR does not apply. Perhaps if you registered you could try following the rules yourself? Or are you permanently banned? Yorkshire Phoenix (talk) 11:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Mallimak warnings

reference

I'd just keep an eye on it... If the IP accounts are used to make plainly unconstrutive and disruptive edits then they should be suitably warned, perhaps leading to a ban if the activity continues. If the user account(s) and IP accounts are used in tandem to increase support for a given viewpoint or evaid 3RR then you've got a case for a checkuser. Thanks/wangi 12:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Just another thing - put the edits on the IP user pages themself, not on the (suspected) user's page - if that IP makes repeated vadalism it will be blocked. Yeah? /wangi 00:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Fairy nuff. But as he changes IP address every evening, it does seem a bit long drawn out. --Mais oui! 06:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I've removed those warnings from Mallimak's talk page. Thanks/wangi 10:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

UK on infoboxes

What is the motivation for the reverts to adding UK, with no explanation other than "rv"? Mrsteviec 13:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah I see. You should have simply changed it to something more suitable rather than removing it all together. Mrsteviec 18:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

If unsure I'd suggest discussing it on the relevant template talk page. Mrsteviec 18:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Hehe. I thought that as I typed it. :) However, the Irish situation is more complex and there is some contention that Northern Ireland is not a "country" within the UK whereas there is no such contention with England, Wales and Scotland. Mrsteviec 19:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry..

Oops! Sorry I put the wrong header. However Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Normalmouth which you requested does require some additional info. --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 08:26, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to User talk:Mallimak

Is there any way you two could bury the hatchet? It pains me to see two good editors at each other's throats all the time. --Guinnog 08:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I know what you mean. I find his POV-pushing wearing too. I only mean that he is not a simplistic vandal, and does seem to have knowledge of the subjects he writes about. I do sympathise with you; I just wish that we could turn his energies into more productive directions. --Guinnog 08:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Orkney deletion

Why did you contact me about the Orkney portal? --bdude Talk 09:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

-- OK, thanks bdude Talk 09:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

• Anti-Orkney attacks on my fellow Orcadians will not advance your causes on Wikipedia I may add. 217.204.65.210 13:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

I figured signatures tell time anyway. ...And Beyond! 17:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

UK Geography Terminology

Is it acceptable for Yorkshire Phoenix to be implementing the "NUTS1" category system they suggested, despite no consensus having been met yet? Summertimerolls 16:21, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

It's more acceptable than the attempts of others to impose "home nation" only geography. NUTS1 are real objective subdivisions of the United Kingdom (Scotland is a NUTS1 subdivision), and the United Kingdom is a political reality, unlike the agenda-driven fantasy of those who believe "England" is an international state. Yorkshire Phoenix (talk) 08:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

CFD for MPs by Parliament

see CFD for category:MPs of the United Kingdom House of Commons, by Parliament and subcategories. Your comments would be welcome. --BrownHairedGirl 17:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Years in England on football template creating large numbers of red categories

Are you planning to actually create all the categories you have red linked by adding that entry to Template:English football seasons? I hope so. The addition has created a large number of red (worthless) category links. Someone will eventually need to create all those categories, or remove the item from the template. Looking through, it looks like there are over 100 categories that need to be created to accomodate this template link. - TexasAndroid 17:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

By country categories

Without wanting to sound like a stuck record I thought I'd just let you know that I spotted and altered another couple of new category entries for the Home Nations which were inappropriate. Just as before really, keeping a lid on 'by country' whereas nation or less specific doesnt bring the same questions. Keep up the good work by the way. Ian3055 23:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Map

Hi - do you mean how did I create them? I did a quick summary for Hellinterface, [2] of the process. I am happy to give a full rundown of how things are done for you. Once you have created a couple of maps it is quite straightforward. SFC9394 23:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Old dog, new tricks springs to mind! :) Many thanks. If I have probs I'll get in touch (pretty much guaranteed). --Mais oui! 00:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Most referenced articles

Regretably, I will not be able to update this page. Please see meta:Toolserver/Reports. -- Beland 00:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

RE: Constituency CfD stuff

Sorry it took me a while to get back, ive not really been very active on wikipedia for the last few months ( only really started properly editing again today). Ive had a read through the discussion and cant honestly come to a strong opinion on what should be done. I can understand the arguments put forward by the two sides and think both have their merits but i really dont feel either is overwhelmingly a greater option than the other so i cant honsetly vote in favour of either. regards, siarach 10:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

UK Geography Poll - Sock Puppetry

Hi. I am also getting concerned as to the validity of the poll. You might like to view [[3]] for information of catching sock puppets.

Best Mdcollins1984 10:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Categories such as "1994 in Law"

I noticed your amendment to Jamieson v. HMA. I see you've taken the year of the case from the SLT reference. It may well be that Jamieson was decided and the judgment delivered in the same year as it was reported in the Scots Law Times but this is not necessarily the case. I've left it as the matter is a bit pernickety but just thought I should alert you to this. At one point Session Cases and Justiciary Cases (SC, JC) reports were lagging two years behind the actual year of judgment.--Lucifer(sc) 13:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Current-UK-MP-stub

Hi Mais Oui, as the creator of {{UK-current-MP-stub}}, I have just posted a reply to the SFD for Current British MP stubs, and wondered if you would like to take a look and consider voting aginst deletione. As posted there, having populated the category, it contains over 300 articles, and there are many reasons why I think that this stub category is both viable and useful. Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl 15:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh lordy. When will this end? The horror, the horror... --Mais oui! 15:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Removal of poll on Welsh nationalism

Please see the Welsh nationalism talk page before reverting my edit of the poll. As you have noted, "Polls should only be used if their methodology is transparent". The source for this poll does not provide that. Please strive to be consistent in your editing. Thanks. Normalmouth 21:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

One tier

It states :-

"Tiered government (a name for each level of local government e.g Truro, Cornwall, UK or Edinburgh, Scotland UK)"

Ignoring the fact that UK and Scotland are not local governement, the examples given involve every tier. The one tier idea seems to be option 2. josh (talk) 07:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

New South Wales

You recently added that NSW was named for South Wales. As a New South Welshman, over the years I have heard both this and that it was named for Wales, the south referring to the southern hemisphere. The South Wales version is simpler, but I have never seen a reliable source for either one. Can you shed any light on the matter? JPD (talk) 09:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

List of sports flops

Hi there. In fact, the AfD that I closed was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List Of Sports Busts, which was a no consensus. Whether it was keep or no consensus, it having been a good number of months you'll be fine going ahead with a new AfD. People will of course point out that it has been tried unsucessfully twice before, and you'll have to justify very very clearly why a new AfD should be considered, but 'ethically' I think you're fine. -Splash - tk 13:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Scotland

Hi there. I think Wikiproject Scotland can probably begin seeing as it has 12 interested members. Give me a shout when/if it starts and I'll give you a hand promoting it etc. Cheers.  Edits  AntzUK  Talk  23:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

IP Address issue

Hello Mais oui. That was indeed my contribution. I was unaware that I was not logged on. I shall have to create a sock puppet thingy. Thankyou. Lofty 11:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Request for discussion on edits and page moves on Welsh nationalism/Welsh self-government

Hi. Can I make a further appeal for you to discuss with me changes to the above article, either made directly by you or at your behest? It is impossible to see how consensus can be reached on the topic otherwise. You said in the complaint made against you by User:Mallimak that "you routinely have to revert [my] edits because they are consistently, and heavily, POV." If so, please, please try and discuss them with me before you move to reverting. I have worked with a number of others to reach consensus on wording for this and other articles, including Plaid Cymru. I have absolutely no inention at all of stopping contributing to Wikipedia, so it really is best if we try and work out our differences. What do you say? Normalmouth 14:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Your "request for deletion" of the List of impoprtant operas

This seems an extreme position to take with first posting something on the Talk page to raise concerns.

As I member of the Wiki opera Group, I think that you are overreacting. Let's all discuss the criteria for inclusion.

Vivaverdi 00:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

No personal attacks

"The fact that the only user who has created English company categories is Scottish... shows that they are not appropriate."

That is a clear breach of WP:NPA: "Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views."

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Mais oui! 16:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

That is not a personal attack, but many of your comments on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion are. I can only laugh out loud that someone as short tempered as you is telling others to keep cool (at the same time as threatening them with blocks, which you don't have the means to impose without opening up your own conduct to examination, and if that happened you would be far more likely to get blocked yourself). I was making a legitimate point about your biased POV. To quote Astrotrain in reply to one of your vicious rants, "I think the point he [Osomec] is making is that only you, a user with a distinct anti-British POV is creating these English categories, and that there is no demand from English Wikipedians to cut up the British categories." It is absolutely essential that the underlying basis of your attempts to disrupt Wikipedia are explained to users who are not familiar with your long track record of misconduct, vicious personal attacks and utter hypocrisy. I suggest you should be blocked for one month. Osomec 08:49, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Scotland infobox

Template:Scotland infobox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Durin 18:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

List of the monarchs of the Kingdom of England

Hi Mais oui!, I noticed you were involved in a dispute with User:TharkunColl over at this article about the name. He is still doing cut-and-paste moves, and has now created an article called List of monarchs of England and Great Britain. Would appreciate your input. --JW1805 (Talk) 02:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I did not create that article, I simply retitled it. All reference books list monarchs of England and then Great Britain. TharkunColl 02:47, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Middlesex Cricket Board

Hi. Just to let you know that WikiProject Cricket is using certain categories as generic to hold various related sub-categories. We have a separate category for governing bodies and administrative units. This article is already in that category, as it should be because it is very useful, but I am removing it from the generic category:Cricket in England - if we left it in there we would have to populate the category with all governing body articles and that is not what the category is designed for. Regards. --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 05:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Northern Ireland cricketers

Hello again. Northern Ireland may be part of the UK but its people are not technically British. Any cricketer in Northern Ireland is Irish both by virtue of nationality and of international team since the Irish Cricket Union encompasses both the component countries, as does rugby football.

It is therefore incorrect on all counts to include a Northern Irish player in category:British cricketers. He should be in category:Irish cricketers only. However, it's a minor technicality only so I'll leave it. The thing is that if a Northern Ireland player was good enough to play Test cricket, he would actually play for England!

If you are interested in cricket, would you like to please join the cricket project as new members are always welcome? Regards. --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 14:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Country / Place names

Hi. Can you take a look at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and possibly tell me what you think about my request> -- Maelor  19:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:SOCA.jpg)

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:SOCA.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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.

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Kevin_b_er 01:05, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Scottish celebrities

Was Category:Scottish celebrities empty when you last saw it? It's tagged with an incorrect speedy delete tag and is currently empty - i'm minded to deleted it, but It'd be good to find out if someone has been clearing it out... Thanks/wangi 20:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

It is not a major issue, but Alan Mcilwraith does not really qualify as a "Scottish celebrity" so do not be surprised if somebody removes this again.--Ianmacm 08:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Scotland

Hi Mais, good work in getting this up and running. I've not been overly productive of late and didn't manage to contribute to the initial discussions, but will toddle along in time, add myself to the member list and start some proper work. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Tapadh leibh!

Thusly is
Mais oui!
awarded this Scottish Barnstar of National Merit for of his tirless and selfless furthering of the presence of Scotland on Wikipedia.

Tapadh leibh!

File:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn File:Icons-flag-scotland.png

I've been gone a few months, but I'm back. I took a look at all the notices you've been leaving me. I'm not ready to jump back in to everything, but I will make an effort to be around. It looks like you've been hard at work, what with transfering things to the WikiProject, and covering every problem that comes up. It's high time an award for Scotland came in to existence, and I can think of no other so deserving as yourself. File:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn File:Icons-flag-scotland.png 07:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Project 'claims' or 'ownership'

Hey Mais oui! With regard to our discussion on my talk page on this subject, I've been meaning to give you a link to this section of the V1.0 Editorial Team talk. Basically I think the consensus at the minute is that if multiple tags are on articles (talk pages) then that's a Good Thing. And that makes sense to me - after all, the more editors we can attract to the articles, the more likely we are to get them improved. :) --Mal 18:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in - wised up WikiProjects are now generally claiming that articles are "within their scope" rather than "part of WikiProject X". Of course it's quite possible for an article to be within the scope of more than one project. Also by claiming only part of scope it's not annoying people who worked on an article only to have a Project come in and claim "ownership" of it. --kingboyk 19:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

That sounds fair enough - its a matter of politeness really. :) I'll have a look and make the relevant changes to 'my' projects. --Mal 01:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Sean Connery

Please don't revert changes without one word of explanation. —Chowbok 20:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject: Scotland

Thank you for your message, and invitation to join Wikiproject:Scotland. I have added my name to the list of members. Regards Astrotrain 13:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Callanish

If you get a second, could you have a quick look at my comment and suggestion here and let me know what your thoughts are? Cheers! Lianachan 16:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Poll Tax Riots

From Talk:Poll Tax Riots Would you be prepared to make the following compromise:

• change the first sentence to "The Poll Tax Riots, as they became known, were major acts of civil disobedience carried out in London."
• Move into the new subcat Category:Riots in London
• Put in the categories Category:1990 in the United Kingdom (it has UK wide significance) and Category:1990 in England (it occured geographically within England).

? Tim! 21:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

"Crookery"

No problem whatsoever. I actually "stold" it long ago from another user. It has gone through a number of permutations in the meantime. I appreciate those who take time to use a template like this. I really think it helps new users know how things work in our community. Best, Kukini 16:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Scrooge v. Libertarianism

I've added a section “Scrooge v. Libertarianism” to the the talk page for Ebenezer Scrooge. —75.18.113.152 06:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Biography Newsletter September 2006

The September 2006 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. plange 23:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Scottish companies

But these should be tagged only as {{Scotland-stub}}s and not as organizations - they're companies and not organizations.--Carabinieri^T_T^a_a^l_l^k_k 21:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

• Theoretically I'd agree with you - companies merely are a type of economic organizations, but {{company-stub}} is not a child of {{org-stub}}. On the other hand I just noticed that the companies-category is a child of the organizations-category, so I guess we (the StubSorting Project) just might be wrong in how we categorized things. The best solution might be to make {{company-stub}} a child of org-stub and then tag the articles in question as Scotland-org-stubs.--Carabinieri^T_T^a_a^l_l^k_k 21:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Discussion currently underway at List of major opera composers, List of important operas and the article Opera regarding POV and sources

I read your comments during the AfD of the List of important operas and thought that you would be interested in reading what is currently happening on the page Talk:List of major opera composers and Talk:Opera regarding sourcing materials and correcting POV statements. It seems that there have been quite a bit of sloppy editting going on in the area of Opera for quite some time and that there is a great deal of resistence to change. I would like to have your view of these discussions and perhaps some ideas for solutions, if you've got time. cordially Musikfabrik 09:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Scotland Infobox

If you object to my changes to the infobox, I'm very happy to discuss them with you - and hopefully arrive t a satisfactory solution. But 'restore infobox' isn't a reasoned discussion, it is just reverting without explanation. Take it to the talk page. --Doc 12:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

link to Basque Country

Hello, when you want to link to the article about the Basque Country, please do not link to Basque Country, as that is a disambiguation page (which nothing should be linked to). Instead link to the one of the options found on that page such as Basque Country (autonomous community) by writing out [[Basque Country (autonomous community)|Basque Country]]. Regards, Jeff3000 21:10, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Counties of Scotland

Added a comment on this article which you also contributed to, regarding your rebuke to that Owain, Yorkshire Phoenix Association of British Counties-type mob. Benson85 23:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

What time o day div ye ca this

Gee whiz, man. Ye're either up very late or very early! Editing Wikipedia at this time in the morning ? -- Derek Ross | Talk 06:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Wickedness is it, <grin> ? Well, well, I'll leave you to your evil ways then. It's midnight here and that's late enough for me. A soft and comfortable bed is calling to me and it's sounding better and better! Cheers -- Derek Ross | Talk 06:13, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

National Gallery of Scotland

Hi Mais, thanks for the note. Nice work and a good start on expanding the article. I didn't realise how under developed our gallery articles were. I'm still not feeling particularly creative at the moment, but I'll don the thinking cap and go ferretting around other gallery articles to make a start on assessing how things can be improved. This could be a nice project to convert me back to a "proper" editor again :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 07:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for starting the survey on Orkney. Having made the request, I wasn't sure how to proceed. Abtract 08:38, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Wells, a dressed wi' clooties or no'

Thanks for your help sorting out the well dressing, clootie well, etc issues! --Kathryn NicDhàna 19:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Pleasure. --Mais oui! 19:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

K&A canal

Ages ago yu added some content to the article on the Kennet and Avon Canal. I've done some work on this and the Locks on the Kennet and Avon Canal and have put them both up for featured status see discussions at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Locks on the Kennet and Avon Canal & Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Kennet and Avon Canal. I'd be grateful if you had anything you could add to either article or the discussions. — Rod ^talk 12:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Convener = Lord Provost?

Local Government etc. (Scotland) Act 1994 Section 4(7) The convener of each of the councils of the cities of Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow shall, with effect from 1st April 1996, be known by the title of "Lord Provost", and the convener of each other council shall be known by such title as that council may decide: Provided that no such other council may, without the consent of the Secretary of State, decide that their convener shall be known by the title of "Lord Provost".[4] Lozleader 20:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

According to Edinburgh City Council "The Provost is also Convener of the Council and continues to carry out the normal duties of an elected member, so fulfils both political and ceremonial duties."[5]

From Glasgow's site: "Under the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1994 all Councils must elect a convener (chair) from among the elected councillors. Councils can change the title of Convener to Provost, Chair or whatever they consider appropriate. However, the Conveners of the cities of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Dundee are to be known as Lord Provost." [6]

Aberdeen and Dundee don't seem to use the term convener (except for committees) as far as I can see.

Lozleader 20:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

This is getting confusing! Councillor is chair of the executive... I haven't seen listed as the convener... He is the convener of the executive which is also the leader of the executive, but the executive is just acommittee of the council isn't it???

Lozleader 20:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Crossed messages! I think we agree. Should I revert the page? Lozleader 20:53, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

List of important operas

I'm not sure if you're thinking of nominating this list for deletion again: but if so, could I ask you to wait. We've all been fixing the List of major opera composers, using 61 inline citations and independant sources to compile the list. I fully realise that an identical "rescue job" needs to be performed. Best, Moreschi 16:57, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Orkney

Your latest edit doesn't make sense; maybe you would like to try again.Abtract 22:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Mossley

I thought you may be interested in this. It could potentially set a standard which other users would want to role out elsewhere. Jhamez84 22:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

--We would also certainly benefit from your input at this talk page. Keep up the great work! Thanks, Jhamez84 00:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Mais oui!'s endless sockpuppet allegations against Mallimak - This archived discussion (Talk Page Abuse) reveals the truth of the situation! Mallimak 22:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Serial sockpuppeteer Mallimak (talk · contribs) is using sockpuppet account User:Orkadian to spam multiple Talk pages. The {{talkheader}} template has been removed and the spam repeatedly re-added. I request admin intervention:

• Orkadian (talk · contribs)

--Mais oui! 12:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Example diff: [7]. --Mais oui! 12:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Provide evidence that Orkadian is a sockpuppet of Mallimak, please. It seems to me that Orkadian has become rather upset by your persistent accusations that he/she is a sockpuppet, and I can't see any evidence for that. --ajn (talk) 12:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mallimak. --Mais oui! 12:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

That's hardly the most convincing checkuser result I have ever seen. It's equally likely that they happen to be editing from the same geographical area, and object to your stance on Orkney (oddly, quite different from your usual stance on regional and nationalist issues). --ajn (talk) 14:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Please also see: [8]. There is a multitude of evidence. But that is not the point: what are you going to do about the Talk page abuse? --Mais oui! 12:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

A suggestion, why not protect the talk page to [edit=sysop move=sysop] to prevent him from adding spam?? --LiverpoolCommander 12:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

This is part of a long standing conflict between the users and a more in depth look at the conduct of Mallimak, Orkadian and Mais oui! is in order.Inge 12:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Is a Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mallimak a suitable thing to proceed with?? --LiverpoolCommander 12:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, to be fair I would suggest a simultaneous Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mais oui! or a combined one. The bits and pieces of the conflict I have seen lead me to believe that both these users could do with some helpfull hints. It seems IMHO that this is part of a complexe content dispute where one user is good at utilising wiki rules and the other is not. Inge 12:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

• A combined RFC seems like a good idea. Can anyone give me a brief overview of what the cause of the dispute is, what lead to it, and what the ongoing situation is - so that I have a clearer idea of it?? --LiverpoolCommander 12:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

User:Wangi is very well-informed on this topic, although he has just had a Wikibreak, and so missed the last episode about a week ago. --Mais oui! 12:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

One user is trying to insert the notion that Orkney has a special identity separate from the Scottish one and has been adding information regarding that to relevant articles. The user has also created stubs, categories and a portal to deal with Orkney subjects. The other user is asserting that Orkney is not any more different from the rest of Scotland than any other part of Scotland and has been removing such information from relevant articles and requesting the stub-templates and so on to be deleted. I think that is the core of this problem. In the process both users may have stepped over the line. The hows, ifs and whens need to be determined, proper guidance need to be given to the users and a permanent solution to the core dispute needs to be found. The articles involved are so low profile that it seems to be very difficult for the few users involved to get there on their own. Inge 13:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that overview, Inge. I think that Orkney should be counted as Scotland, as it is technically Scottish and not a sovereign state. This content dispute should be taken to a WikiProject who could assist with this incident. --LiverpoolCommander|Commander' 13:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think the Orcadian users are claiming that Orkney is not a part of Scotland, but that the people who live there share an identity as Orcadians and that that identity is more or less considered separate from being Scottish. I don't think I am quite able to convey that situation acurately, but I would like to inform that I have the personal opinion that Orkney (and Shetland) claims of being different does have some creedence. They are not just another area of Scotland (allthough they are very much politically and legally part of that country) and history, geneaology and (former) linguistics back that up. But that really isn't the issue right now :) Inge 22:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Comming back to the immediate issue, rather than the underlying problem...

One thing that needs to stop is the constant reverting an readding of Orkadian's comment on various talk pages. While the comment is not about the articles themself it's not worth getting into an edit war about. However the comment needs to be kept out of the article and category namespace and Orkadian has not readded them since I pointed this out. I'll pass on commenting on the comment itself...

I'm disappointed that Orkadian/Maillimak are not making any constructive edits. After this is an encyclopedia - and writting it is our goal, if you're just here to dick around with turf wars then...

I'm not convinced Orkadian and Maillimak are a single person, but if it is two people they're acting in close cooperation. I'll keep an eye on things, but i'm as busy as ever and back travelling tomorrow... Thanks/wangi 13:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the user(s) were initially trying to make constructive edits, but were over-enthusiastic and were then frustrated by Mais Oui!'s uncharacteristic objection to petty regionalism. I spotted this dispute a while ago, when MO listed the Orkney portal for deletion. Orkney does have a quite different history to the rest of Scotland, and Mais Oui!'s "just a council area" stance really doesn't do that justice. --ajn (talk) 14:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I support that view. I believe if a couple of outside editors would like to involve themselves more in depth the articles affected could be very much improved and the users in conflict could be guided back on track to the future benefit of Wikipedia. If we let this issue go now we will just find it again on a later date and/or loose valuable contributions. I see these request for help pages as somewhat of a jungle so if someone knows a more appropriate place to take this issue, please do so and give a link here. Inge 12:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Mallimak is not blocked, I am at a looss to understand why he would use sockpuppets, but there is not much doubt in my mind that Orkadian and Gruelliebelkie are either sockpuppets or meatpuppets. That said, Mais Oui! is unquestionably prone to strong opinions and there is not a great deal of evidence of these disputants making any real attempt to find common ground. Any RfC should be a joint one, and should be called something like "Orkneys islands" rather than singling out one side or the other, there being evident fault on both. On the practical level I don't see that there are so many articles on the Orkneys as to make a separate portal necessary or desirable, but if people want to have one and link it from the Scotland portal then I don't really see how that would violate policy, since Orkadians unquestionably do have a separate identity at some level. Not that we are here to Right Great Wrongs, but I don't see any neutrality issue in dealing with the Orkneys as thematic set of articles. This is, of course, a superficial view. Guy 12:11, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I am glad to see that there are some people here who have recognised what is going on. At the beginning I had so much to offer Wikipedia, and I made a start on contributing Orkney-related articles, an area of knowledge I know a great deal about. But then I encountered Mais oui!

I think it all started with his objection to the use of the term “Orcadian”, and he started replacing it everywhere with “Scottish”. Now let’s get this straight once and for all, “Orcadian” is an accepted term used to describe somebody from Orkney, and it is widely used – and for good reason, it pin-points the origin and culture of the person so described much more precisely than the term “Scottish”. (Furthermore, there are many in Orkney (and indeed Shetland) who object to being described as “Scottish”.) I have never claimed that “Orcadian” is a nationality, but neither, note, is “Scottish” a nationality. If Wikipedia is going to be consistent, the correct nationality is “British”! (I’ve not looked into it, but there must be analogous situations like Frankish/Bavarian/German or Frisian/Dutch.) I have never claimed that Orkney is a “sovereign state”, but note, Scotland is also not a “sovereign state”.

Anyway, it seems that I had inadvertently strayed into a territory that Mais oui! claims for his own. For example, it was he that set up the Portal:Scotland – but would he allow me to set up a Portal:Orkney – oh no! Incidentally, there is a Portal:Cornwall, and nobody seems to object to that.

Everything on Orkney that I contributed to Wikipedia had to be part of Mais oui’s domain, and he edited my articles in such a way to make sure that they were. Talk about WP:OWN.

I have plenty of encyclopaedic Orkney-related articles to contribute to Wikipedia, but what’s the point when Mais oui twists them and uses them as fodder to feed his own POV agenda. Personally, I feel Mais oui! should be banned from Wikipedia – he is distorting the project and putting off other contributors. He violently attacks users who disagree with him – sockpuppet allegations seeming to be his favourite form of attack. (Yes, shortly after Orkadian came onto the scene I did get in touch with him, and yes I am now in regular contact with him - but he is not me.) Out of frustration I have tried to retaliate against Mais oui!, but as accurately observed by Inge “one user is good at utilising wiki rules and the other is not”, and I am the one who is not - and why should I be? I didn’t come here to have my time and effort wasted by this kind of nonsense.

I have given up in despair. Until Mais oui! is banned (or at least banned from editing any article I contribute), there is absolutely no point in my contributing any further articles to Wikipedia. If you want to read NPOV encyclopaedic articles about Orkney, written by people who live here or have a close association with the islands and therefore know what they are talking about, I suggest you look out for our independent site.

Writing is my goal, not (as wangi puts it) “to dick around with turf wars“ – that’s Mais oui!’s specialism.

Mallimak 21:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)