User talk:Ben MacDui/Archive 12

DYK for Máel Brigte of Moray

On April 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Máel Brigte of Moray, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Royal broil 18:05, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Viking Ships in Scapa Flow

I didn't put the {{fact}} there because I thought it was controversial (it isn't) but because the article made no supporting claims other than that sentence in the intro. I see you have now fixed that. Good work! Daniel Case (talk) 03:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies if the edit summary read a bit snippily. I tend to use the fact tags for edits that I think are dubious rather than those that contravene our obsession with in-line citations, but thanks for the compliment. I support your campaign for Latin abbreviations btw. Ben Mac Dui 10:00, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar awarded!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Awarded to administrator Ben MacDui in recognition of his lengthy work on 'Community de-adminship', and for his flawless and inspiring civility throughout the regrettably dramatic final stages. Thanks for being an inspiration to me and all clueful Wikipedians! Jusdafax 00:08, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now that some of the dust has settled MacDui, I wonder if you deem it worthwhile to have a chat here about what happened. I have no wish to point fingers or name names, just exchange views on the process of Cda and whether you consider it wise to make another attempt sometime down the road with a modified Uncle G version, or not. Regardless of your decision(s), you richly deserve this barnstar, and thanks again with very best wishes always! Jusdafax 00:08, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are very kind, as ever. Yes of course I'd be happy to - my time is a bit limited at present, but fire away if you like - I'll hope to say something sensible in a day or two. Ben Mac Dui 08:30, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Background

Prior to the CDA process there were at least two high profile cases of admin misbehaviour. In the view of some members of the community, Arbcom's reactions were either slow, or inadequate, or both. The creation of WikiProject Administrator was to some degree at least a reaction to these events.

In the first CDA round it became clear that there was a demand for some kind of Admin recall - although it was of course to hard to tell how wide or deep this demand was and is.

Wiki - Process

In an environment where all voices are essentially equal, providing any kind of leadership is difficult. Making "helpful suggestions" is likely to pay better dividends than any kind of authoritative "this is the right way" statement. However, even this will only work if those involved maintain goodwill towards one another and the overall goal. The CDA process worked very well in some ways but the combined factors of:

The impossibility of simplifying debate by removing or merging silly or repetitive contributions contributed significantly to the TLDR problem.

The engagement of those who were actively hostile to the idea took me by surprise - although it should have been predictable enough. The idea that individuals who don't like something can simply arrive and attempt to close it before it is at all clear what the outcome actually is strikes me as being absurd. The fact that it didn't succeed does not make the process any more functional.

The process ran out of steam in mid-January and from there on it was downhill. The advantage of the process is that made it more clear to me (if not to more aware others) just how absurd individuals who take a dislike to an admin or admins can be and leant weight to the view that more robust constraints on trivial nominations needed to be in place than CDA then allowed for.

In between times, the new Arbcom was voted in and (as I recall) most of those selected were in favour of some kind of recall process. However, the length of time that the drafting process took and the lack of pertinent new scandal meant that with the passing of every day a successful vote became less likely.

Summary of my present view

I remain in favour of a simple admin recall process that would enable those with a genuine grievance some recourse. I don't know whether or not a modified CDA is the answer. It may be that the awareness of Arbcom, and the community at large has been raised to the point where a new process is no longer necessary, for the time being at least. Part of the problem is that RFCs seem to provide a cumbersome way to gauge opinion but little else exists. As noted elsewhere, subjects that need strategic leadership are very hard to address from within the current community culture. Ben Mac Dui 19:21, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliantly stated, and I thank you for stating your views so clearly. I have been on a bit of a wiki-break but do intend to return to this topic in the coming weeks. Jusdafax 15:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back. Ben Mac Dui 14:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dwarfie Stane

Dear Sir, I am a Dutch archaeologist who visited the rock-cut tomb many times. I started a study, searching for Major William Mounsey. After 25 years I even found a book with his hand-written text in the Royal Library in The Hague (Holland). If possible I would ask you not to remove my details. I already kept it as short as possible, because the Dwarfie Stane is more important. You can use: www.google.com and type: "w.h. mounsey" castletown. Click and click again on: Hissen-Mounsey Family. Than scroll a while till: (21) (there are more!): William Mounsey (1808). I hope that you will understand why I informed you. Kind regards, Lex Ritman192.87.123.13 (talk) 09:13, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Lex Ritman, Thank-you for your enthusiasm for Wikipedia. I (reluctantly) removed this material at Dwarfie Stane for two reasons. First of all, no reference was provided and it is an important (if often overlooked) policy of the encyclopedia to ensure that a reliable source is provided for new information (per WP:VERIFY). Secondly, the information seemed to me to be essentially about Mounsey rather then the Stone itself. It may well be that a new article called William H. Mounsey is in order. I am afraid I am not an expert on eccentric British spies, but if you would like assistance in setting this up just let me know. Regards, Ben Mac Dui 09:54, 24 April 2010 (UT

Dwarfie again

Thank you for your reaction. I understand. Problem solved elsewhere. Meaning inscription. Lex Ritman192.87.123.13 (talk) 10:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you have understood at all - you have simply replaced the information there without any citations. It might be helpful if the conversation was continued at Talk:Dwarfie Stane. Ben Mac Dui 18:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Being bold, I created William H. Mounsey, feel free to exapand there, ideally with refs! Akerbeltz (talk) 19:08, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good one. It is perhaps a bit early to be considering this, but it could be a candidate for Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page/Did You Know. Ben Mac Dui 19:33, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dwarfie and thanks

Dear Ben MacDui, You are right. I am content with your solution. An article about Major Mounsey is a very good idea. Now he is at the right place. Sorry for not understanding you. I am not experienced with the making of this kind of stuff. Kind regards, Lex Ritman

Mounsey

Dear Sir, I added: references and bibliography. Lex Ritman

Excellent - although I am "watching" the page (see button on the bar to the right of "edit this page") so I would have spotted this.

The next step would to be provide citations for specific statements - see Wikipedia:Citing sources#Inline citations and let me know if you want any assistance. Ben Mac Dui 18:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mounsey - reaction

Thank you. I am on holiday. No internet (except now). Will come back to you in June. Will upgrade article. Help me with recitements. Know nothing about it. Till then. 81.157.23.160 (talk) 18:51, 14 May 2010 (UTC) Lex Ritman[reply]

John Stevenson (geologist)

Please restore the article "John Stevenson (geologist). The prod was contested. Pooet (talk) 18:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Tis done. Ben Mac Dui 19:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for restoring the article, but the PROD was contested before you deleted it. Should you not check the edit summery before deleting a prodded article? The nominator is still at it, and has re-added the prod again. Will this editor be warned that he should not restore removed PRODs and removed Speedies? Pooet (talk) 20:07, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At the time of deletion it was a speedy, and whilst I may well have missed something I am not aware that a previously contested prod cannot be a valid speedy deletion. You are however quite correct that I missed the previous speedy nomination in the edit history, for which I apologise. I see that you have already warned the user in question and that he/she has apologised. I will contact them if you like, although I am not sure what good that would do. I will watch the AfD with interest. Ben Mac Dui 09:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

speedy deletion tags

I noticed you rightfully removed the speedy deletion tag on Assyrian Patriotic Party. As a matter of fact, User:ܥܝܪܐܩ also tagged the Assyrian Socialist Party article, and since two months he seems busy on a "anti-assyrianist" crusade on wikipedia, see his user and talk pages. I only realized it today, as he put the tag on Assyrian Socialist Party, a noncontroversial stub I created more than 4 years ago. His technique was 1) delete two thirds of the stub, including the references 2) adding a speedy deletion tag on a minked stub consisting of only one sentence ! My point is: I don't believe at all he acted in "good faith", this is more like some sort of ideologically-motivated vandalism. Have a look at his "contributions". --Pylambert (talk) 21:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong with applying rigorous scrutiny to nationalist pages. I gave valid reasons for my edits and used talk pages where required. Compare his contributions today. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 22:37, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I realise disputes of this nature can be difficult to resolve, and the best way forward might be to take such an article to AfD rather than repeatedly trying to get it speedily deleted. You are quite right that "applying rigorous scrutiny to nationalist pages" is very important and (accepting that this is a subject about which I am not knowledgeable) some of the content may be questionable and some of the articles non-notable. Equally however, an editor adding back content that you have removed that includes a citation is not generally considered to be vandalism either. I urge you both to take a deep breath. Further suggestions are available in the lower half of this page. Regards, Ben Mac Dui 08:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI ܥܝܪܐܩ is now blocked permanently for sockpuppetry. --Pylambert (talk) 19:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A block of some kind was tediously predictable. Thanks for letting me know. Ben Mac Dui 08:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYX nomination for Rachel Chiesley, Lady Grange

Hello! Your submission of Rachel Chiesley, Lady Grange at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mikenorton (talk) 15:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!

Well done on getting another Scottish article/list to featured status... You do nice work! :) MeegsC | Talk 16:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are very kind - although I fear I try the patience of the reviewers. Ben Mac Dui 18:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish travellers

Hiya, quick favour to ask - there's a fairly uncontroversial page move (from lowercase to uppercase as it's an ethnicity). We tried using the reqmove tag but for some reason it tells us the page has already been moved. I suspect it has something to do with there being a redirect already, could you have a quick look and tell us what we're doing wrong or if you feel it's ok to move, just move it? Cheers! Akerbeltz (talk) 20:05, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Tis done. Ben Mac Dui 09:01, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gun robh math agad - may there be good at you, as they say in southern Gaeldom! Akerbeltz (talk) 10:49, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Buíchas mór duit, mar a deirfá anseo. Many (big) thanks, as they say in these parts. RashersTierney (talk) 11:04, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nae bother at a'. (English: The inconvenience was of trivial proportions). Ben Mac Dui 11:40, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LOL nice glossing MacDui. Buíochas (or Gaelic buidheachas) is actually much more fascinating than "thanks" - it's literally "yellowness" as yellow was considered a lucky colour amongst the Gael of old. :) Akerbeltz (talk) 12:33, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not so lucky for a neighbour... Ben Mac Dui 12:41, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cute ain't he?

File:Great Skua Featherdale cropped.jpg

cute little feller, ain't he? Wasn't scared of zoo visitors either...Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:42, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I expect you'd look pretty grumpy if you ended up in a zoo on the far side of the world! Ben Mac Dui 09:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And it was a warm day too! This was a sunny summer Xmas eve outing (good day to go to zoo as v. quiet. we'd done all our Xmas shopping.) Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:52, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lewisian Gneiss

Hi MacDui, your edit to Gneiss has prompted me to start building an article on the Lewisian complex. Google books gives full access to the relevant chapter of Geology of Scotland, which makes my life easier, although the coverage is so in depth that keeping the article within bounds is a challenge. I managed to complete the Moine Supergroup but my partly built Dalradian Supergroup is currently waiting for me to make a map (and it's been waiting for about 6 months :() so I would appreciate a prod if the Lewisian article doesn't appear within a few weeks. It irritated me to find that Lewisian gneiss was a redirect to Gneiss when I edited Sule Stack and your edit was the final push I needed to start work. Just sometimes (well rather often actually) I run out of steam so a bit of encouragement from yourself would be good. I promise that the Dalradian article will appear at some point, after all it's your local rock. Mikenorton (talk) 13:27, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moine looks great - and I'd be happy to collaborate although I don't have a lot of detailed sources. Just let me know how I can help. Ben Mac Dui 08:35, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a gentle reminder would be great, to keep me to the task; I was going to suggest snapping at my heels but given what you are, perhaps looming over me would do the trick. Mikenorton (talk) 19:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MacDui, that's exactly what I needed, I've added a bit more just now, but need to get some sleep after a moderately exhausting weekend walking in the Yorkshire dales, I'll work on it again this week. Mikenorton (talk) 23:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent - look forward to the results. My regards to Pen-y-ghent. Ben Mac Dui 18:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome MacDui, it's still missing a few sections on the overall interpretation and how it matches with other orogenic belts of the same age, but eventually I just get this sudden urge to get it out there. Next task is to start an article on the Hebridean Terrane. Mikenorton (talk) 12:27, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great start - I note that Outer Hebrides has a referenced comment that "These are the oldest rocks in Europe and amongst the oldest in the world". Ben Mac Dui 17:03, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered about that claim - oft repeated as you say, I think it depends on how you define Europe - if you include Finland (which makes sense to me), then they're not the oldest, ages of up to 3.5 Ga have been determined there [1]. Mikenorton (talk) 19:21, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Rachel Chiesley, Lady Grange

On May 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rachel Chiesley, Lady Grange, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Help please?

I've made some minor alterations to the Clola page and tried to insert some links and references? Still not too sure if I'm doing things correctly or appropriately - sorry. Sagaciousphil (talk) 18:34, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Mr. Hill and Shetland's Independence Movement

You should note that my text is just an addendum to what was already in the article. I understand you have a problem with accepting any new activities in Shetland's Independent Movement being mentioned on the Shetland page. I have now removed all mention of Mr. Hill, and the "Uncited speculation" quote "As in Orkney, those devoted to uphold the links with Norway, are often also vigorously in favour of a more independent Shetland" unqoute - even though this is common knowledge. I hope you can accept the new version, as I am sure also the English Wikipedia could benefit from being up-to-date and accurate. Wikarth (talk) 07:09, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong with updating Wikipedia with relevant material from Reliable sources - but this is neither. Firstly you are not providing any citations - although they could probably be found. The larger problem is however that there is no indication that Mr Hill's publicity stunts, whilst they are relevant to his own article and possibly the associated Forvik micronation one, are one of the most significant issues affecting "Shetland today" as the short section is called. The whole article is rather weak and one day when it is improved this section would be devoted to a short history of post-WW2 Shetland, in which Mr Hill would be unlikely to figure. Your interest in the subject is welcome, but it needs to be directed to the appropriate place. When Shetland Islands Council start taking Mr Hill's notions seriously, they have a place in the article. Ben Mac Dui 08:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. We will ask SIC what should be important enough to put in Wikipedia ! As you are an admin, I rest my case. I understand your political views, and I understand that this is no democracy. Thank you for your time, Mr Mountain. Wikarth (talk) 09:34, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Major Mounsey

Dear Sir, Back from Holiday, I added information. One big problem remains. I am no expert with Wikipedia, meaning the technical side. I placed footnotes/citations, hoping that you will help. You offered your help, that is why I dare ask you. See please: article: Dwarfie Stone and click on: discussion. There you will find information that possibly can help.I hope you can do something about is. Of course it is only a request. Thank you, Lex Ritman192.87.123.17 (talk) 15:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

192, since you have the relevant books, there's not much Ben or anyone else can do. Best to learn a little about how to add refs. If you want to, I can narrow it down to the essentials for you. Akerbeltz (talk) 16:18, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Major Mounsey (help!)

Please narrow it down for me! I thank you on forehand. Lex Ritman192.87.123.13 (talk) 08:38, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mounsey

Thank you for your help. I shall try to do something with it. First I will be away for a long time. After that I will be busy with references, etc. Lex Ritman.11:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.87.123.13 (talk)

Thank you for all your help and patience. Lex Ritman192.87.123.13 (talk) 11:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thought you might be able to tell me...

http://www.nls.uk/maps/atlas/blaeu/view/?id=108 You see on this map, there is an island/rock called Kraig Maur opposite Culross, and then to the left opposite Rossyth Castle there is another island called Dow Kraig. What are these islands called today? If you don't know don't worry, but figured you might. :) All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:02, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Making an educated guess, I would look for something called Craig M(h)ór/Creag M(h)ór and Du(bh) C(h)raig/C(h)reag or any variation thereof you can think of; "big rock" and "hidden rock". Beyond that, over to MacDui! Akerbeltz (talk) 15:55, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear from you Deacon - hope you had a productive break. I'd say that "Kraig Maur is "Craigmore rocks" at grid reference NT001845. It is a small skerry now just off the artificial "Preston Island", which was created using ash slurry from Longannet power station. There is no sign of Dow Kraig - possibly now part of Rosyth Dockyard - or possibly even dynamited to improve access to it? Rosyth Castle itself apparently originally stood on a small tidal island. Given the small size of Craigmore rocks, wherever Dow Kraig once was, it can't have been very big. I can barely read the text on the Blaeu maps, but there is a different one of the same area on commons although these islets are not marked. Ben Mac Dui 17:50, 31 May 2010 (UTC) PS If you saunter over to your nearest chandlery or nautical bookshop and take a peek at The Yachtsman's Pilot to North & East Scotland by M Lawrence you will see more detailed maps than the OS provide and there might be something more there. There are quite a few "Craigs" on that shoreline and it is quite possible that one of them fits the description but that the OS didn't bother to name it. Ben Mac Dui 18:06, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given the name, I'd check a sea-chart. It may well be a submerged rock only visible at extremely low tides. Akerbeltz (talk) 21:54, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers very muchly, Ben. Thanks for the ref ... I'll check it out! :) Both rocks on the blaeu map should be highly visible (with the name) on the link I left, if you max the resolution. I can take a screenshot if you like, and increase the resolution (could be used in wiki articles if the secondary material is located). Thank you too, Akerbeltz. I have enough Gaelic to work out what those two terms mean, but I didn't know that dubh shared the "hard to see" connotations of English "dark" (in contrast to "black", which doesn't have those connotations). Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:31, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome and yes it does; most features at water level containing dubh don't actually refer to colour but visibility. Let us know if you find them! Akerbeltz (talk) 18:02, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Was being dense re the magnification. Long Craig is now under the Bridge I see. If I come across anything on a sea chart I'll get back to you. Ben Mac Dui 19:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

St Andrews have a nice picture from 1909. On the assumption it is the shore rock in the foreground, Dow Kraig is probably now under what looks like reclaimed land south of Dunsyre House at NT116817. Ben Mac Dui 17:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey hey ... that prolly explains it! :) Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pibroch

I know it's not exactly your kettle of fish but we've got a problem at the pibroch article with an editor who's refusing to work with consensus (small as it may be) and now we've got a spate of new single-issue editors popping up. I don't want to even start edit warring but was hoping you might offer some insight into what to do? Gun robh math agad! Akerbeltz (talk) 19:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to read WP:CANVASS carefully, but I'll take a look asap. Ben Mac Dui 08:03, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note left at WT:SCO. Ben Mac Dui 17:32, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Have read WP:CANVASS (that was a new one to me LOL) - I take it from that that you're suggesting posting at WT:SCO might be a more diplomatic option? Just trying to make sure I understand the message here. Akerbeltz (talk) 17:59, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - I am not very familiar with it and there are clearly grey areas, but what it asks for is "Remember to keep the message neutral" and suggests using a noticeboard. I'm happy to help of course. I had a look at the single-issue editors and if this problem is genuine and persists it may be worth reporting to WP:SPI. Ben Mac Dui 18:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would you be so kind as to give us support!

Dono suport al chapter
Wikimedia CAT.
I vós? Si us plau, signeu en senyal de suport.

I support the Wikimedia CAT chapter.
Don't you? Please, give us your support.

Hello, I hope you're doing fine and I sincerely apologize for this intrusion. I've just read your profile and saw that you're an enthusiastic Scotsman (I went to Edinburgh not that long ago and I really appreciated the people and the wonderful place! Beautiful and really nice!), so I guess that being Scottish helps you understand what are an endangered language and culture and maybe I am not bothering you and you will help us... I'm a member of a Catalan association "Amical de la Viquipèdia" which is trying to get some recognition as a Catalan Chapter but this hasn't been approved up to that moment. We would appreciate your support, visible if you stick this on your first page: Wikimedia CAT. Supporting us will be like giving equal opportunity to minorized languages and cultures in the future! Thanks again, wishing you a great summer, take care! Keep on preserving your great culture, country and language! Mar sin leibh!Capsot (talk) 07:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No obvious place to put it overleaf but I am delighted to support la llengua de Llull. Ben Mac Dui 17:16, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome, and thank you for your attempt to educate me about Wikipedia. However, this user isn't impressed, so please don't make condescending remarks, as you did to my user page. Readers aren't really looking at my user page, so I guess this is all kinda pointless anyway. If you'd like to experiment with editing, try the sandbox, where you can write practically any shit you want.

Thank spam!

Hello, Ben MacDui. You have new messages at User:TFOWR/Thankspam.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TFOWR 21:05, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish death wish?

Have you seen this? Hope you are in the 2.5%! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:19, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It has received some TV and other press coverage here. Since the smoking ban in 2006 those watching the TV in a pub can now of course see the screen, which may or may not encourage further efforts towards healthiness. Your kind thoughts are appreciated, although the odds are against me - clearly I have under-estimated the challenge involved! Ben Mac Dui 10:43, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comhar Dún Chaocháin Teo - Plea for clemency from the Irish Gaeltacht

Comhar (talk) 17:36, 13 June 2010 (UTC) Re: Comhar Dún Chaocháin Teo. As I'm not on Wikipedia that long (although I have done a lot in a short period of time) I think that you put my article on Comhar Dún Chaocháin Teo up for speedy deletion on the grounds that it is not notable. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do to save it from deletion. I have done my best and I believe its quite important for us that it stays where it is. Quite a lot links to it although I have to admit I havn't linked it to a lot yet - have been very busy working on Táin Bó Flidhais article. As you're from Scotland, this area of Co. Mayo is more remote than anywhere I've seen in Scotland AND we have had a ten-year battle with oil giant Shell over their plans to destroy us. My son lives in Scotland between Inverary and Lochgilphead as he was unable to find work in Ireland - we have a desperate struggle for environmental survival and I can only assure you that we are far more desperate than anywhere in Argyll and Bute for the survival of our culture and a reasonable standard of lifestyle having been under this heavyweight threat for many years. Please can you take off the nomination for speedy deletion from this article because I am afraid that if I remove it, you'll only remove the whole article immediately or something. I do think it is notable in terms of its situation in one of the most remote and vulnerable spots in Ireland currently. Thank you.[reply]

No answer? It appears that you have done something called 'speedied' my article on Comhar Dún Chaocháin Teo. I am presuming this means you want it removed speedily? As it relates to North Mayo in Ireland I can't really think why it offends you who lives in Scotland, according to info above, so can you tell me why you want rid of it so much? As I'm not a particularly experienced writer on Wikipedia please tell me what I should do to save it? Do I simply remove the notice on it? Do I put something on it called a 'hangon'? You're assuming that everybody knows the answer to these things. Well, I don't and I would like you to give me some answers to the above questions please. I really don't think you understand what's it about at all. Have you read the discussion on it? Will you please remove the deletion tag on it or else I would like a full and decent explanation of why you won't? what is your interest in North Mayo? Have you a reason to remove this article? Does it offend you in some way? If so, in what way does it offend you? I have tried to improve it as recommended? And, I think its impolite of you to put notices on my articles and then refuse to answer any of my questions. What will you do if I decide I don't like something you wrote? Is it any of my business? I don't think it is but if you delete my articles which appear to me to have no relationship to you, then I may just take a look at yours and see what I think of them? Is this a game of tit for tat like children or what? Please explain your actions. Comhar (talk) 19:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Comhar, if I may butt in? MacDui declined the request for speedy deletion: I declined it as having potential although I believe it is borderline.

MacDui then proposed the article for deletion, which appears (to me, at least) a reasonable course of action given MacDui's concerns about notability. This "proposed deletion" invites other editors to consider deletion. Any editor may remove the {{prod}} tag, including you. If the tag were to be removed, an editor could then propose the article for deletion. That would prompt a discussion on the article, which would result in the article being kept or being deleted. Feel free to follow this up with me if you wish, but rest assured that MacDui is not the bad guy, here :-) TFOWR 19:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Maybe I just don't understand the system. I don't know who or why someone has flagged this article for deletion? MacDui's name seems to be there and I don't understand why. Also some fellow called JamesBWatson - As far as I can tell this article doesn't offend. It is informative in particular for the many walkers interested in this remote area and who often have no idea where contact can be made with anybody. You say I can remove the tag myself? I see many articles or paragraphs of articles I think are ridiculous but I try to amend rather than put them up for deletion. MacDui is Scottish - I just wonder why he wants rid of a Co. Mayo article. I have no idea who Watson is or why he thinks my article should go. If he should ever visit this beautiful and remote area does he want to fall off a cliff edge into the wild Atlantic never to be seen again because he had no information to hand?

MacDui won't be allowing their own point of view to affect their work; I'm also sympathetic (I'm resident in Scotland in real life, and have visited Ireland often, though I'm a Kiwi), but I'll be applying the same policies in my editing as MacDui.

You can indeed remove the tag. I haven't looked closely at the article, but I did look at it's talk page - from I can gather the concern is about notability. Have a read of that, and continue to improve the article so that it addresses the notability concerns. There's nothing to stop another editor nominating the article for deletion, but that will at least ensure a discussion, and an opportunity to further improve the article. TFOWR 19:47, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks TFOWR. To sum up:

JamesBWatson suggested the article be speedily deleted on the grounds of that the article "does not indicate why its subject is important or significant."

The creator of an article may not remove a speedy tag - that has to be done by an admin. That's where I came in. I "declined" the suggestion of speedy deletion but, in fairness to the concerns of JamesBWatson, I put a "prod" tag on the article indicating there were notability concerns.

You, or anyone else can remove this tag whenever you like, if you don't think this is fair.

If that is your view, my suggestion is to work a little on explaining the significance of the organisation using suitable references and then remove the tag at the top of the page - which you must do before 18:33 on 2010-06-17. If you don't an admin can delete it on sight on the grounds that no-one was interested enough in the subject to either improve or support the article.

The deletion process is complex, and in my view not very clearly explained - I hope that's helpful. As TFOWR suggests my personal views on the subject shouldn't really matter - although you can reasonably assume that if I thought it was utterly unworthy I would have "accepted" JamesBWatson's request and deleted it first time round. Please feel free to ask for further advice or explanation. Ben Mac Dui 20:42, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the explanation. Comhar (talk) 06:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gentlemen's Society of Thought

You have just deleted a page which I was in the process of researching, and I had asked on the talk page for more time in which to complete this work. Seeing as the deletion notice was only put up this morning, I feel its deletion was a little hasty and unnecessary, and I received no response on the talk page. According to the rules that led to my page being deleted, the Victory Services Club should also be deleted, which is nonsense. I plan to re-create my article unless I hear otherwise from you. 00vis (talk) 18:00, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was aware of the talk page message, but please bear in mind that "speedy deletion" is just that - it may happen within minutes of the article's creation. There was no indication in the article as it existed that the Society was likely to conform to guidelines for inclusion. Please see Wikipedia:Notability. You are at liberty to re-create the article, but I would strongly advise you to include references to reliable sources that indicate why it is a notable subject - or the same thing is likely to happen again. Good luck. Ben Mac Dui 21:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, I'll try to make my next creation meet the standards! 00vis (talk) 18:12, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Torridonian pages

Hi MacDui, while writing my latest epic, I noticed that the three Torridon articles,Torridonian, Torridon Hills and Loch Torridon, were in a bit of a mess with lots of repetition and duplication. I will rewrite the Torridonian article but perhaps you could have a go at the other two? Cheers, Mikenorton (talk) 21:51, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason I am becalmed in Morvern at present but I'll take a look asap. Thanks for the Finnish info - I will check this out and amend as required. Ben Mac Dui 07:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No hurry, I'm just trying to finish the Torridonian expansion so that I can add it to my current double nomination at DYK for 'Lewisian complex' and 'Hebridean Terrane'. I think that the explanation for the number of RS that use the 'oldest rocks in Europe' line is that the Finnish dates are relatively recently determined, possibly with a side helping of Chauvinism. Mikenorton (talk) 12:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gaelic Talking Mountains

I've started (a bit) on doing sound and IPA for the Munros. I've added them to the List of Munros - feel free to tweak the layout if I'm breaking some long-standing conventions, I'm not a mountaineer! Beyond that, feel free to add them to the relevant pages as I make them, I will probably only have time to add them to the list as I can do those in convenient blocks. Akerbeltz (talk) 18:58, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will do - catching up on "to do" list today. Ben Mac Dui 08:07, 28 June 2010 (UTC) Done.[reply]

Great. I'll do another batch soon and let you know. I presume working through the Munros and then the Marylins is ok in terms of priority? Akerbeltz (talk) 10:15, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest I don't hang out much with the other Munros, but Section 17 would be my priority. Ben Mac Dui 10:57, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deep

If only more people tossed such jewels into edit summaries! Thank you for this enriching thought. PL290 (talk) 11:58, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome. Ben Mac Dui 08:22, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Kilpatrick

Thanks very much for your comments on the New Kilpatrick article. I think I'd lost sight of the wood for the trees! I've rewritten the intro, merged in the Brittanica section and made the geology section less technical sounding. You mentioned that there were some other oddities. Maybe you could either fix these yourself or list them on the article's talk page and I'll work on them. Also, I'm not sure if the place names section should be here or on the individual article pages, your opinion would be valued. Wikiwayman (talk) 12:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look at it, but it would be helpful if you could say what kind of guidance you are after - is your high dream a "B", are you hoping to take it to GA, or perhaps even higher things? I don't want to provide a lot of flannel you aren't interested in. Ben Mac Dui 16:24, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure there's enough secondary source material out there to make it a GA like most of the ones I've seen elsewhere, although Henry de Lichton is short article I think I could match for length and scope. I've read the GA criteria again, and I feel I'm getting there. You'll see that I've edited quite considerably since your last review and to make the article more focussed and less "odd". Wikiwayman (talk) 15:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scotland forever

I'm very sorry to write this here (apologies) but I dont know how to sent messages on wikpedia. I have added the Source about Robert Maxwell and the regency of Arran its from J, Taylor,(1887) Great Historic Families of Scotland. If there is a problem could you please tell me how to contact you properly kindest regards Terence Maxwell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.140.122.117 (talk) 01:19, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply - you're doing fine. As you can see I have added the publisher, which is always useful to have. Now there is a full reference included, but ideally we would have what's called an "in-line" citation that notes the page number(s). You can see the kind of thing above the sentence you added. For example, after the last line of poetry "Nuts in plenty in the wood." there is some odd-looking text that says<ref>Downie (1933) pp. 34–35.</ref>, but which just appears as a number when you are not editing the article. All this means is that the words are taken from Downie (1933), pages 34-35. In many Wikipedia articles a book reference may be sufficient but as Arran is what's known as a "Good Article" the standards are a bit higher. If you want to have a go yourself, please do so. Alternatively if you just want to give me the page numbers here I'll add them myself. Ben Mac Dui 08:50, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great - I have removed some of the additional detail that isn't necessary in the in-line citation. Let me know if I can do anything else to help. Ben Mac Dui 13:43, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if this should be included in Fauna of Scotland or not ;-), but knowing your sense of humor and love of (almost?) all things Scottish, I thought you might enjoy this article. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:07, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, these guys certainly know how to market themselves, even if the result does little to improve our international standing as respectable citizens of the world. You have reminded me I have been meaning to contact you about a certain lady.... Ben Mac Dui 18:01, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just assumed it was a combination of Scots thriftiness and ecological awareness (recycling roadkill). I am not sure who the lady might be - drop a line on my talk page or email me if you want. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised to hear that Scots are still considered thrifty after the recent little difficulties. I'll be in touch soonish - nothing controversial. Ben Mac Dui 08:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These things are pretty much all relative. Looking forward to hearing from you, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Books LLC

Hi,

You had ordered a book from Books LLC. I was wondering if you have received it, and if you were able to determine if it was a copy of the Wikipedia article(s). Regards, Whpq (talk) 18:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did, it has, and it is. This doubtless renders List of one-club men for example, as highly notable. Ben Mac Dui 19:21, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I must commend you for laying out some cash for confirming the contents. Thanks for the information. -- Whpq (talk) 19:25, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Despite suggestions to the contrary we Scots are spendthrifts of the worst kind. Ben Mac Dui 19:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A certain lady

I will be glad to look at it in depth - did a quick read through and noticed a few paragraphs with no refs. Do you want to put this up at Peer Review or do you just want me to make comments on the talk page? It will take me a few days, but it was a fascinating and very sad story - nice job. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer is that if you think its a credible candidate I'll take it to Peer Review - your comments are very welcome meantime of course. Ben Mac Dui 07:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assunming references can be found for the unreferenced material, I think it would have a very good shot at FA and would be glad to review it. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome - I thought it was a very interesting article. Thanks very much in advance for the comments - Finetooth has given a detailed review and Niagara has weighed in as well, so we have some feedback already. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:03, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish map

Obersache has a long standing obsession to revert every relief map and reinsert plain plastic looking ones. He does it for everywhere. He's reverted all of my attempts to make relief maps when they often look for better. The consensus at WP:Scotland is for relief maps right? This is why the old green map was replaced with a new relief map. If he persists ever report him for 3RR or revert him. I'll revert him wherever I can too. He needs to learn to respect consensus. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:03, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hemings þáttr Áslákssonar

(May as well have another redlink to encourage someone to write it up - the þættir are appallingly badly represented on Wikipedia.)
I am Blogathoning for the next 24 hours, so won't have time to do much if any research today. But editions of the sagas sometimes leave out the þættir because they are such digressions. However, this is one of the standard examples discussed in reference to this motif. If you have access to an academic library, I'd suggest trying the 2 academic sources I've listed at the end of the Shooting an apple off one's child's head article; the other hefty possibility is differences in transliteration of the name. Also Google Books is getting better about search for words with alt. chars. but it's still a weakness. Sorry not to get on this one right away, bad timing. (Oh and Hemming Wolf also needs to be added to the article; Grimm cites him in his list. Just in case you run into a nice cite for that version of the tale.) Yngvadottir (talk) 13:21, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Following up on this today - it does indeed seem to be omitted in the Penguin Classics edition of Orkneyinga Saga, which I'm guessing is the one you have. All the Fláteyjarbók þættir are digressive to modern taste. However, there is a 1962 edition with English translation by Gillian Fellows Jensen (am adding to the article as a source). And the Norse appears as Appendix C in the Rolls edition, ed. Gudbrand Vigfusson and George Dasent, on Google Books but hinky - pages 347-381 - I'm adding info from the preface to the article. This has been reissued by Kessinger. Yngvadottir (talk) 01:31, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For creators:

Yes, I do, and many thanks. The nearest academic library is quite a few days bike ride away I'm afraid but I will look out for the Kessinger edition the next time I visit more civilised parts. Ben Mac Dui 07:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of The Crucible of Iron Age Shetland

I have nominated The Crucible of Iron Age Shetland , an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Crucible of Iron Age Shetland . Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. MickMacNee (talk) 15:49, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Islands, outlying, Scotland, list, featured, candidate...

Hope you don't mind my pedantry, I've made a request to Dabomb, in these lean times, to ensure I get a look at everything. It doesn't mean I know best, but it does mean that at least every list gets a review.... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness, not at all. Your observations are mostly spot-on. Please excuse the levity of some of my replies. It's getting late.... Ben Mac Dui 21:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there

Let's start out friends. I get you with BLP but why are you removing that entire passage? Obviously the person is illegitimate and is the patron of the society recognizing him. Their goals are modern and commercial. The existence of a verified agnate disqualifies the head of this corporation from the historical chiefship. DinDraithou (talk) 07:52, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no views on the legitimacy or otherwise of the various claimants, but if you are going to make allegations that the Scottish Government is recognising "false chiefs" you need to provide a citation. This is not just a question of providing references from reliable sources for controversial claims, it is potentially defamatory. I am more than happy to remain on good terms, but you really need to care with this sort of thing. Ben Mac Dui 08:00, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article was making controversy before I appeared. It was dismissive of the only "prince of the blood" in decades! In truth these commercial, so-called female line chiefs have little business in it at all after his appearance. Defamatory? What? Give me some citations for the rest of it first. Prove they belong at all. Cite a single reliable source, that isn't just an "official" list, establishing anyone but Guy MacLeod as the legitimate chief. DinDraithou (talk) 08:26, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Burke's Peerage on GoogleBooks has the line of chiefs. Talisker's probably listed there too, but not as a chief of the clan, only as head of the MacLeods of Talisker, i imagine. So far we've only got one news article mentioning the Talisker thing, and it is just that he claimed the chiefship. It doesn't support his claim over another. It's up to you to cite a source stating that so-and-so is 'false' and that such-and-such line is 'base'.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 08:55, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are the middle class heirs of a so-called female chief. They are not noble, and cannot be made that, nor could they be by her. Try and prove they are something more. DinDraithou (talk) 10:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting the impression you've gotten irritated with me and are now singling out certain material. Your approach is not consistent. WP:CITE was the wrong one to pick because most of the article cites unreliable sources, or sources unsuitable for the claims being made. www.macleodgenealogy.org is unreliable. This is a Scottish clan so most of their history is made up anyway. Why don't you just add the appropriate tag to the top of the article? DinDraithou (talk) 13:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But I'm really quite tired of it all, I've just found. I reverted you right after waking up this morning, and then another reverted me. Looking at it now it actually looks fine. So anyway. Cheers. DinDraithou (talk) 14:32, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it gets a little frustrating when someone does not seem to understand something that you think (after a year of editing) ought to be clear. Just to re-iterate in the hope of making what I am saying as obvious as possible.

I don't have strong views on the article itself. The aristocracy, faux or otherwise don't interest me very much.

You are making statements about Guy MacLeod, an apparently living person. These must be sourced.

Claims, however accurate, that are controversial should also be sourced or they are likely to be removed.

The sad reality that Wikipedia is full of unsourced speculation and indeed dross is not an excuse, or reason to suggest that the above can be circumvented.

Finally, I wish you very well in your endeavours. Ben Mac Dui 19:05, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Ben MacDui's Day!

Ben MacDui has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
so I've officially declared today as Ben MacDui's Day!
For being a great person and awesome Wikipedian,
enjoy being the star of the day, Ben MacDui!

Signed, Neutralhomer

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, click here. Have a Great Day...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am grateful for your generosity and thoughtfulness! Ben Mac Dui 18:41, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RIcketts Glen thanks

	<font=3> Thanks again for your peer review, kind words, and support. Ricketts Glen State Park made featured article today. Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:01, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are most welcome. Ben Mac Dui 18:41, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April Fool's DYK – Rudyard Kipling (ship)

Hi there, just wanted to say first that it is a nice country you are living in. Okay, you made a comment showing your support for ALT5 of the April Fool's DYK nomination of Rudyard Kipling (ship). Do you intend to approve it? I think if there's no issue, you can just give the tick and move it to the verified hooks section. I agree too that ALT5 is most poignant. Regards, ANGCHENRUI ^Talk ♨ 06:51, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not actually signed up as a co-ordinator at Wikipedia talk:April Fool's Main Page, but perhaps I should consider this. Ben Mac Dui 12:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shetland maps

Replied where you suggested. If anything the pin maps should be removed, the shaded island locators are much better for showing islands. Dr. Blofeld 18:13, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ta - dashing out and not back until tomorrow evening - will respond asap. Ben Mac Dui 18:14, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could negtiate something with Nilfanion to make locator marked maps of every Scottish island to replace the pin dot? I think an island locator is much better than a pin map, pin maps are intended for settlements not islands. Then you could update the infobox and replace them. I'm sure WOSlinker would help you recode the infobox if needs be. Dr. Blofeld 20:52, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

St Kilda

Hello MacDui, thanks for your comment about my minor edits on the St Kilda page. I note that you reverted or changed them. I'm absolutely not going to argue with you or change anything again as I assume you know far more about St Kilda than I do, but on a pedantic grammatical point, it was the islands which were evacuated, not the inhabitants. Buildings, aircraft and, in this case, islands are evacuated but unless they were given laxatives, the people aren't. This was the reason for one of my changes. Earldelawarr (talk) 12:11, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you take a look at Talk:St Kilda, Scotland#Evacuation you will see a discussion where this point of view was considered, but ultimately rejected. I do know a little about St K, although perhaps not that much about grammar - if you have any new information to add please do so there. Ben Mac Dui 18:28, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review of Rachel Chiesley, Lady Grange

I've left a few comments here, but nothing serious. This is obviously an excellent article and a fascinating story. Malleus Fatuorum 19:56, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks indeed - as you can see I've replied. It is indeed a remarkable tale - and a good reason never to live in Edinburgh... Ben Mac Dui 21:03, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kirkwall

You don't see the point of improving Kirkwall? I don't understand your comment. Two different issues - one is the need to improve the article, which clearly does need work - for example, it has a too-lengthy introduction, Kirkwall also has a lot of history worth putting in and so on. I was in the middle of preparing that when you deleted the tag. Secondly, the location boxes are now in a great many cities - are you going to remove them all, or just the ones you don't "see the point of"? Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 17:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also climate information - it's the capital of Orkney and so well worth having. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 17:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I assume the first is a rhetorical question. I don't see the point of putting tags on pages saying they "need expansion" - it's a start-class article for goodness sake. I' be more than happy to see some more detailed history and yes the intro is far too long. Climate - the section on Orkney could be improved on but the climate of Kirkwall is essentially going to be the same data as for Orkney as whole. The location box might conceivably be a useful template either at the end or as part of a much expanded geography section. However, without anything to indicate that Finstown is a few miles down the road and Reykjavik is more than 400 miles away across the open ocean I am not sure it is all that helpful and I didn't think it made any sense as a geography section in and of itself. Please be assured I am more than supportive of improvements to the article, and if I can assist I will. Ben Mac Dui 18:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I didn't intend to add the location box in a void - it was part of a small plan in my head to add climate data and rework the intro. I do think key towns like Kirkwall matter for people - on things like location and climate, Wikipedia is a service. Not everyone will go over to the Orkney page. In addition, the location boxes work well as "relationship establishers", allowing people to jump easily from place to place and learn about towns they had not seen before. The distant places in the case of coastal or island key towns are to add an amusing and interesting touch - I assume it may give people an interesting moment of pleasure to see that Rejkjavik is along a north-easterly track for example. Nothing deeper than that. These are fun and informative and I hope you will accept it - I anticipate they will grow and people will see the value. On the rest of the article, I would particularly enjoy writing more of the history in - I have a good small library on the Orkneys, one of my most loved visiting spots in real life. Hope you will like the results but feel free to butt in if not. Many thanks. 19:07, 21 September 2010 (UTC) Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 19:14, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kildonan

Ben, I'm really dissapopinted in you. I know you live in Skye, which I guess gives you particular provenance for those articles which relate to Skye. However, I think it is exceedingly poor manners and shabby conduct on your part to unilaterally remove an article without any communication with the article editor. I would like to point out that Kildonan is considered a village according to osmaps found at [[2]] and the Scottish Gazzeter article also consider's it a village. They have an article at [[3]]. If both those sites didn't have a page about this picturesque village then I wouldn't create an article about it. There is a process which needs to be followed on this instance, which is called Articles for Deletion. This village article Altandhu was recently put through the Afd process and was kept. The Kildonan article should be kept as it is clearly notable. scope_creep (talk) 18:26, 08 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, it has not been removed, it has been redirected. Secondly, the links you provide confirm that the place exists. That is not in dispute. The question is, does it meet notability criteria? There is nothing wrong with having an article about a very small place if there is something worth recording about it - see for example Lochbuie, which has a medieval castle that was the seat of a locally important clan, was visited by Johnson and Boswell, and used as a location for a 20th century feature film. Please see WP:NOT, WP:NOTE, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland#Non-villages in Aberdeenshire & Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland/Archive 4#Villages in Blah.

Category:Skye villages has 65 entries. That is roughly one for every 140 people and in my view already somewhat over-the-top.

Can you find any reliable information of value about Kildonan that would justify the article's existence? Also, can you direct me to the Altandhu AfD - I don't recall it appearing on the WP Scotland list and I'm curious. Finally, rumours of my life on Skye are greatly exaggerated, although I do visit from time to time. Regards, Ben Mac Dui 09:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know i've made a few mistakes in the past about creating these geographic articles, mainly becuase I was relying on osmaps for single source, and created mistakes, as osmaps is extremly precise and complete, unlike Wikipedia. However the process I have know includes both the Scottish Gazetter and google street view, Google maps, and Google search. If it says it's a village in OSMaps and it's has an entry in the Scottish Gazetter, usually meaning it of at least the size of a hamlet, meaning more than 6 or 8 houses and constitutes a recognisably geolocation for a group of people. I then take a look in Google, in Street view, and if's it looks like a village, or hamlet, with a solid cluster of houses or if its spread out then it gets an article. So no tiny wee villages, with 1 or two houses gets an entry. Only those places which osmaps and the Scottish Gazeteer agree have already decided are notable enough to record get an article. In my view that makes them notable enough as people live in them. Some of these villages have been in existance for 600-800 years but somehow they're not notable, and as an argument that notablity can't be established because they don't have a cathedral sitting next to them, is clearly fallacious.

First of all WP:NOT states that Wikipedia is not an paper encyclopedia but your statement about and the links discussion clearly violates that tenent. I know that WP:NOT and WP:NOTE are not offical policy but guidelines. But in every instance in your statement above is asserting that they are, and that is incorrect, and more so it is damaging Wikipedia. I know that as an administrator it's your duty to follow the rules and try and reduce the dross that comes in, but valid articles that can be shown to be notable outside wikipedia, should be notable inside, within this meaning.

Lastly, I simply don't have the words to describe how bad I feel about that statement - has 65 entries. That is roughly one for every 140 people and in my view already somewhat over-the-top. As a software engineer I can't describe to you how plainly false that statement is. People like Bertrand, Leibniz and Gödel described how it was impossible to descibe any system of knowledge without refering to external knowledge and it was impossible to know in any level of detail how much knowledge would be needed to describe other knowledge. So that argument is also fallacious. I think if that statement held in the next 10-30 years, Wikipedia is going to remain simply a plain paper based encyclopedia stuck in the past, and become ever more irrelevant, in an age when the complexity of information becomes ever more deep and entangled.

The village is called Achduart an article I wouldn't have created, even though the village is truly isolated in the middle of knowwhere, and as such is important for the local folk who live there. This is it's Afd entry. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Achduart. Hope that helps. scope_creep (talk) 15:09, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as a Kil- placename, there must be some evidence of a monastic cell? Which -donan was it? There's probably room for expanding it a bit. Akerbeltz (talk) 15:52, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scope Creep - Firstly, your growing knowledge of Wiki policies does you credit. Secondly, I see no reason for you to feel bad about anything. We have a different view of what is and isn't useful that's all. Thirdly, I have no idea what you are on about regarding Leibniz, Gödel et al, (but equally have no need for a further explanation unless you feel inspired to provide it). Fourthly, I sincerely apologise if anything I have said to you implies that my admin status has anything to do with the current dispute. It does not, I am simply exercising my editorial rights like anyone else and I assure you I am not intending to start intervening with admin tools in what is simply a "deletionist/inclusionist" discussion. (Or at the very least if at some point in the future the discussion goes wildly off-track and I think this may be necessary I will provide ample warning).

Re Achduart, had I spotted this I'd have voted "delete". Today my reading of the map suggests it is simply a farm, (see ad) albeit possibly one with a history as a larger settlement of some kind. Given the fact that the coord template directs the unwitting visitor to the sea somewhere off the Summer Isles, it is my suspicion that no-one involved in this erudite debate bothered to even look at the OS map concerned. Perhaps you could take the trouble to fix this?

Akerbeltz - Please cease and desist! The last thing we need is Scope Creep learning some Gaelic or we shall find every hillock and rivulet in the Highlands appearing on the New Articles lists, backed up by no end of lexicographical mischief :) Ben Mac Dui 18:17, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

disambiguation

Hi. I was linking some Irish archæology stuff, when I noticed you linked a George Petrie from here. The detail seems to match George Petrie (artist), who is associated with Edwin Wyndham-Quin. By the way, the latter also has some redlinks to associated topics, early societies, if you familiar with these and are interested in finding targets. cygnis insignis 19:01, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they are the same. Here, for example, he is described as a "local antiquarian, and Orkney Sheriff Clerk". I will see if I can find his birth and death dates. Ben Mac Dui 20:18, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! They give 'local' to distinguish him from the 'well known' antiquarian. I suppose a record of the local sheriff might be the lead. Cheers for the assistance, cygnis insignis 20:34, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I rather think they mean "local" as in "knows what he is talking about".... Ben Mac Dui 07:20, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate!

Hello! As you may be aware, the Wikimedia Foundation is gearing up for our annual fundraiser. We want to hit our goal, and hit it as soon as possible, so that we can focus on Wikipedia's tenth anniversary (January 15) and on our new project, the Contribution Team.

I'm posting across User Talk pages to engage you, the community, in working to build Wikipedia not only through financial donations, but also through collaboration in building content. You can find more information in Philippe Beaudette's memo to the communities here.

Please visit the Contribution Team page and the Fundraising page to find out how you can help us support and spread free knowledge. ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 18:44, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I could especially use your help as a translator if you speak any of the native Scots languages (or any non-english language, for that matter). ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 18:44, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moved here from your User page

No. It wasn't me. I don't care about some stupid mountain. Will creating an account and all the hassle get rid of the spam or this is just anoter way to harras those who have the nerve to use something you label everywhere as "free" and "public"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.81.9.253 (talk • contribs) 03:35, December 4, 2010 (moved here by Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:53, 4 December 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks - I am still here, even if distracted by pressures of work recently. Ben Mac Dui 18:22, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons Greetings!

	<font=3> Merry Christmas / Happy Holidays, Happy New Year, and all the best in 2011! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:02, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nollaig shona duit! RashersTierney (talk) 22:01, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And all the very best for 2011 to yourselves. Ben Mac Dui 11:49, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]