Archives

1,2,3,4

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Sarah is away on holidays and won't be back until later this week, but noticed this question. Try this link showing the precise geographical location, so it would seem to be correct. Cheers ww2censor 13:11, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi folks....I'm back now! wassup?!!(Sarah777 15:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

They're threatening to ban you for an entire bloody year at Arbcom. Absolutely f**k*** outrageous!

Show them your article creation list, Sarah, I think you probably have the record.

Sure you lose your rag from time to time - but don't we all, especially when faced with extreme provocation and wind-up merchnats....Gaimhreadhan ^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)} talk • 17:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sarah777: No, I feel that the Adare bypass article would best remain seperate from the N21 page. I created it as an aside to the Adare page and, if anything, should be merged into that. The bypass is going to impact on Archaeology and the economy of Adare (including property rights) during the construction phase. When the road is completed then I would support merging it into the N21 page. rubensni

Ireland articles		Importance
		Top	High	Mid	Low	None	Total
Quality
	FA					4	4
	A
	GA					5	5
	B	5	2	7	3	39	56
	Start	2	3	25	122	237	389
	Stub			8	160	317	485
	Assessed	7	5	40	285	602	939
	Unassessed	0	0	0	1	286	287
	Total	7	5	40	286	888	1226

Category:Ireland articles by quality

Hi Sarah

This is the first time I've edited a wiki article, it was great fun, but I am complete beginner and you are clearly an expert! I was trying to figure out how to change that background title wiki put in with the lower case surname for ages. Thanks for your help! How did you do it?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pamela Gardiner (talk • contribs) 11:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh.. I didn't sign either. Thanks again! You make a good teacher...is editing this how I reply, or am I supposed to be doing something different?!Pamela Gardiner (talk) 19:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's just fine Pamela - Sarah777 (talk) 22:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Sarah, guess what..I need your help! I noticed someone called Ww2censor has added a 'needs references and citations' tag to RG's page, so thought I'd try my hand at converting the embedded external links, to external refs and a proper refs section...looked up how to do it in guidelines and added loads of Refs, cited the official biog with page numbers etc and added them, and weblinks ...but Ww2censor who added the TAG says its still 'unsourced'...dont know what he means or what I'm meant to do to make it 'sourced' now? Got some lovely photo's for a Gallery too, awaiting permission from various photographers...can you explain why Ww2censor still thinks its unsourced?Pamela Gardiner (talk) 19:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pamela. I'm at a bit of a loss myself! Fifteen in-line refs in an article of that size seems pretty good to me. Maybe Ww will explain here the specific bits of information he reckons still need a reference. He watches this page like a hawk so we might get lucky! Don't worry too much the article is fine - he probably wants you to drive it to a B class :) Sarah777 (talk) 23:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sarah, he's removed the TAG now, and tells me the refs are 'a bit messy', guess that's because I've just hit them when I can, (full time teaching and freelance editing doesnt give me much free time, but I am enjoying this and think its all in a good cause! .. So I'll try my best to tidy them up. On the bright side, I got sent some fab photo's of RG's site specific work this week, four of them taken by the artist himself...I've just emailed the copyright holder to see if he'll give me permission to use them for a Gallery! Keep your fingers crossed. Maybe that will make Ww2censor happy...? You never know, it might drive the article into a B class...? I dont much about this stuff..novice...just keep reading the 'How to' guides...how do you become a member of Project Ireland?91.109.189.204 (talk) 12:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC) whoops ..wasnt signed in..Pam[reply]

Hope you like the mini gallery Sarah, that's my first gallery! Still waiting for a reply from Mr Gillespie about a some photo's he took...fingers crossed!Pamela Gardiner (talk) 23:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice - mind you I liked The Jubilant Man where he was - dramatic. When you get some more maybe put him back? And remember, no matter how much it looks like 5 will fit the gallery only lets you put 4 in a row. Sarah777 (talk) 00:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the tip! - I'll worry about how to make a new row when I've got five photos. I agree, about the jubilant man, I dont think he belongs in the gallery, he doesnt really have the required detail for a gallery pic, and is, as you say, more dramatic! I just didnt want to make a gallery with only one pic! So if the other pics I'm hoping for turn up in the wash, it's a deal, we'll move him back91.109.189.204 (talk) 06:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jubilant man back in his rightful place!Pamela Gardiner (talk) 21:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fabulous image of Pater and Ned, 1996.. at the top of your page! Can we put it in the gallery? Its Rowan's memorial to Irish working men, he was trying to put something back into the centre of the village that he thought it had lost.Pamela Gardiner (talk) 22:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re 'Pater and Ned' ..sandyford isnt really my territory, i'm just trying my hand like a novice...could put in a quote from Rowan's biog that's about Sandyford..but wasnt quite sure if that was the done thing! ..this wiki stuff is addictive!

on another note ..I was looking at the page on the Great Hunger ..Do you think it might benefit from a section entitled 'The Famine in Irish Literature'...?... I've just read Joseph O'Connor's The Star of the Sea (which is about the potato famine and life aboard a coffin ship) ..other people might know some fab literary references to Famine..? Pamela Gardiner (talk) 21:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Thanks for the rating Sarah...definitely wouldnt have known where to start without you!Pamela Gardiner (talk) 22:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Sarah! Lusk whith 5,236 population is village or town? (Прон). (90.154.207.255 (talk) 16:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

We'd call that a town...though I think Lusk has long been regarded as such. Sarah777 (talk) 22:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I will write in bulgarian article Lusk is town. (Прон) (87.126.206.42 (talk) 14:15, 30 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Hello Sarah.

I think if you wanted to nominate for AfD then it would have to be carefully worded. Two AfDs in quick succession can often be dismissed as in bad faith, though I think in this case it could be acceptable. What would be required would be a well worded proposal explaining why this article is inherently POV-laden and thus adds little to the project at the same time acting as a large energy sink. If you wanted to try that, I could take care of the technical aspects of nominating on your behalf. I would rather not propose the deletion myself, since as the protecting admin It would not be appropriate.

If you wanted to rename, then you could start by making a proposal on the talk page. What new name are you thinking on? Rockpocket 06:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rockpocket, I'd have to give that some quality thinking time as I reckon "List of killings considered massacres by the Western Media" won't fly! Let me sleep on it! Sarah777 (talk) 19:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like the little quotation at the top of your User page. Also the memorial to Gaimhreadhan. He telephoned me twice to discuss Wikipedia proceedings, and I found him most delightful. One of the world's losses, I fear. Regards, David Lauder (talk) 14:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. He made a big impression on me in a short time even though we didn't actually agree on very much. Integrity and courage shine through the cyber-fog. Or so I like to think. Sarah777 (talk) 19:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing here!

Good to see we understand each other.....Sarah777 (talk) 01:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not already familiar with the case you might find the article Haditha killings interesting. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 13:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sarah. Can you stop Joelypie212 from vandalising the Clones page? Peter Clarke (talk) 11:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I dropped a blatant vandal warning on his talk page. He has probably gone, but if he comes back with that account, just go to AIV. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 11:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i was wondering why you removed this link from this page. it has nothing to do with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steph mcdonnell (talk • contribs) 17:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Benny McDonnell is heavily involved with the local junior teams. He can be seen in action on http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=GekDn9nx450

Unless Benny is notable in the Wiki sense this has no place in the article. Not sure what you mean by it has nothing to do with you. Sarah777 (talk) 22:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, links to YouTube videos are frowned upon, per policy as copyright is often incompatible or missing - Alison ^❤ 22:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re this edit, which part of 0RR were you struggling to understand? Next time will be a block. Please let us not go there, especially when the discussion seems to be making progress. --John (talk) 21:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think my edit summary made it incredibly clear why I made the edit - don't you? Sarah777 (talk) 21:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not talking about why you reverted, I am talking about the fact that you reverted at all, in spite of the agreement on the talk page. You are very lucky not to have gone straight to a block; you can thank the fact that my cold is better today. Do not even think about doing it again, if you want to be able to edit Wikipedia for the next few days. --John (talk) 21:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Poor little John. You saying your judgement is dependent on your mood? Is that what Wiki Admins have come to? Not objective standards atall atall then? What was wrong with my edit - answer that and spare me tedious details about your sniffles. Sarah777 (talk) 21:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you read the reply at my talk. This conversation is now over, but I warn you I will not be so tolerant the next time. Do be careful, as in spite of your disingenuousness I do still think you can be part of the solution rather than part of the problem. Rather than making another clever comment, think about what I said; it is not negotiable and I will not negotiate it with you. Best wishes, --John (talk) 21:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose one should record here that one made an appalling mistake and have abjectly apologised to John (on Ali's page?). Despite my claims I can now confirm that John is not English. Also, his cold is gone and thus, QED, cannot be claimed to be affecting his judgement. Which judgement is spectacularly sound. Sarah777 (talk) 22:05, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sarah. I'm reading an interesting book at the moment, which I think that you might enjoy: The Decline and Fall of the British Empire by Piers Brendon. I, of course, see this as a terrible tragedy and I suspect that you do too ^{[wry joke]}. Anyway, it's a rather critical, left-wing view of (surprise!) the decline and fall of the British Empire. The section on the Irish Potato Famine is very interesting, but short, and I couldn't really recommend buying the book simply for the 3 or so pages that are devoted to that subject, but I suspect that it would be interesting to you because it takes the British narrative (more or less what I was taught at school) - ie. it's not simply an Irish perspective - but the references are 'anti-British'. The overall effect is rather effective. If I can summon up the energy I might post something on the Talk page. (To be howled down, no doubt.)

Incidentally, apropos all the massacres excitement, I have an interesting quotation from a Spanish armada captain, wrecked on the coast of Ireland, describing how his sailors were summarily massacred by the wild and woolly natives as they swam ashore. Although it's mostly one way, it's not all one way!

How on earth have you managed to fall out with John, above? He's one of the more reasonable Admins (so bad luck)! That must take some doing... . --Major Bonkers (talk) 20:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: you might find this discussion and links of interest. --Major Bonkers (talk) 12:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi folks and folkies - I'm back after a couple of days in the Occupied Six! Major - it wasn't easy but I managed it! Now I'm off to read who's been squabbling with whom during my brief bit of foreign travel....Sarah777 (talk) 20:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am leaving a friendly notice to invite you to participate at a requested move from 'Football in the Republic of Ireland' to 'Association football in the Republic of Ireland', due to your participation in a previous requested move. Hope to see you there! EJF (talk) 21:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! That was friendly. Normally messages claiming to be friendly contain miscellaneous threats, often of the Administrative kind. What a nice change! Sarah777 (talk) 23:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For a reply see my talk page. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 09:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I started an article (one in a series under construction) about 10 minutes ago and already you and another have tagged, retagged, edited, deleted etc about 5 times! Pl check what is going on before wading in - thanks. Sarah777 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it's was my blunder:( And I'm sorry serio:(Alden(Sharon boyfriend) or talk 00:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I have please for you: Please, don't use any more offensive words in my discusion, because I will carry about it admins, I can see that you were blocked, so be through with harmful activity. Good night. Alden(Sharon boyfriend) or talk 00:20, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Man - I've had more blocks than you've had hot breakfasts based on you page! But you should always look before you leap. Sarah777 (talk) 00:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please: settle petal! And you no personall attacked me ok? I won't let myself such things, you think that since you are on the net you are tough? Here reliable principles are prevailing - principles worked out by the community so that everyone can efficiently function, and in order to fight around trolling which you are coming into contact with at least of course it is only my subjective opinion, because never not idze until the end to have the objective opinion. Greets;] Paweł Alden or my talk page 10:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know the CfD was closed as merge and you just created 6 more of these categories anyway. I strongly suggest you stop creating them until a possible deletion review has completed. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:58, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you continue. I'm not going to use administrative powers when I was involved in the CfD, but if you don't stop creating these categories then I will report it to WP:ANI. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have my answer on your page. ANI? That's one of the few places I haven't been to yet. Sounds kind of exciting! They'll dish out Admin powers to anyone these days, eh? Sarah777 (talk) 03:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they dished them out unanimously at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/PrimeHunter. It's actually rare people get upset at me. I'm not out to get you or anyone else but just doing what I think improves Wikipedia. You have strong feelings about the category system. Maybe take a look at WP:COOL. I'm glad to see you have stopped creating the categories so maybe you don't need it. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Dotty Admin Batman! Not a single 'oppose'. Be sure to alert me the next time so I can break your duck. Figuratively. Sarah777 (talk) 04:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I still need a ruling from Angus-Who-Made-the-Appalling-Decision; pending that I'm on hold. I must say I'm rather surprised nobody else got annoyed with you; personally I get annoyed about lots of things. Especially Wiki-Admins. Anyway, as you are Danish you'll appreciate your forebears played no small part in trying to destroy the vast trove of written records in Ireland from 400 to 900; I guess you are merely continuing that tradition. Sarah777 (talk) 03:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware of the terrible vikings. We have been more civilized in the last millenium. I haven't removed or supported removal of a single character of Irish history. I merely prefer another way to organize that information and hope you will continue to add to it even if you dislike the structure. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In case you miss it in among all the other piffle: there is no reason to stop, more categories make no difference. Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:18, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi sarah, i just wanted to point out that one problem with doing year categories with ireland is the lack of standard dates between 400-700. the annals use various dates and professional historians make their decisions based on their interpretations of theses dates. in the various wikipedia articles i have seen on irish history in this period i have seen no standard used and dates are going to conflict. in all the articles on early connacht, munster, and ulaid kings that i have started, i am using a standard introduced by Daniel P. McCarthy a professor of mathematics at university cork who has done an exhaustive analysis of the annals chronology and has come up with a standard of dating which is fantastic.This is not followed in other articles i have seen on the early high kings of ireland and could lead to much confusion.just wanted to let you know.if your into some heavy reading on it you can check the website https://www.cs.tcd.ie/Dan.McCarthy/chronology/synchronisms/Edition_4/K_trad/K_synch.htm. Timelinefrog (talk) 04:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! ;] I'm not responsible for what is Alden Jones doing and I don't know why he said thanks to me [1]. I should explain my edits anyway. I have removed proper piped links—just forgive me for these edits, I've just forgot about reading a proper MOS. I also hid empty sections. In this case, I suggest to use {{sectstub}}, just to fill these empty sections with some text. What do you think about that? What's more, I also think we should add stub template to the article. Greets. Visor (talk) 12:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, not the categories. There's a problem with doing stuff like [[23 April]] [[1014 in Ireland|1014]]. It doesn't work with the automatic date formatting stuff - see this - so anyone who has set their preferences to show US or ISO style dates is going to be surprised. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what the problem is here; I never link to days (eg 24th) or months - I think it's daft. Only to years as in 1014. Sarah777 (talk) 17:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I only saw the one - this. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can't see it! If you look carefully I added a year-link to a date someone else had already linked :) Sarah777 (talk) 22:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah, I assure you that my intent was not to revert edits with which I have an ideological problem. My revert was done specifically because the previous edit had damaged references and left incomplete text in the article. I said so in my edit summary. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 23:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RJ, I'm paranoid. It's as simple as that. Sarah777 (talk) 23:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I empathize. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 04:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here Ye, Here Ye! For one week beginning this Very Moment I will refrain from editing any Ireland v Brit Occupiers articles; including but not Exclusively 1641; The Troubles & soforth. Ditto the execrable "List of so-called Maffacres" & soforth. And be Advised that in the Realm of Ye Years in Irelande not a single category shall I create nor even alter howsoever deserveth. The reason for these measures are that the Roads of Irelande; Villages thereof and even the Hills and Streams are currently Bereft of my Attention. Sarah777 (talk) 23:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah, if you have the time and inclination, I wrote an article on my favourite author on the NI war. It's at Tony Geraghty, if you have the time and inclination to have a look. I've also proposed some criteria at the massacres talk page; what do you think of them? --John (talk) 08:02, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, you lasted - a whole day! Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 22:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed Bastun I can fairly say I'm some hours into my second day. Be amazed. John, I will look at both - have some catching up to do first. Sarah777 (talk) 00:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently copied the contents of a page and pasted it into another with a different name. Specifically, you copied the contents of Emo and pasted it into Emo (music). This is what we call a "cut and paste move", and it is very undesirable because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. The mechanism we use for renaming articles is to move it to a new name which both preserves the page's history and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. In most cases, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself by this process, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves to request the move by another. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. --Muchness (talk) 02:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you'll be willing to support my Request for Adminship. Thanks. MurphiaMan (talk) 12:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Got me! Actually despite your many flaws and failings I was going to support you!! :-) Sarah777 (talk) 00:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sarah, do you remember the discussion we had about doing a years in Northern Ireland navigation template based on {{YearInIrelandNav}}? (see User talk:BrownHairedGirl#Navigation_template_for_years-in-Ireland_articles)

Norrn
Iron
demo of #000062
border colour

I think we both moved on to other issues, but it still seems like a good idea. So I suggest that I create the template with NIShape.gif, which can be replaced with a better image if anyone finds or makes one. Is that OK with you?

Also, I think that we need to decide a colour for the border of the box. I think that neither orange nor green would be appropriate (both would be seen as partisan), and I can't think of a suitable alterantive ... so I suggest the we use the dark blue #000062 as used on the website of the Northern Ireland Executive. I assume that the dark blue colour scheme must have been agreed by the parties in the executive as an acceptable alternative to the colours associated with the various political strands in NI, and that it's therefore as close as we can get to a neutral solution.

I have done a very crude doodle to the right of this text. What do you think of that as a start? (I'll ask Ardefern too). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:NIShape blue.gif

Norrn Iron
demo of #000062
border colour

OK, I have now created a blue version of the map Image:NIShape blue.gif, and the box on the left is an updated doodle using the blue map.

I think that it does the biz, but what do you think? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have now done a draft of the template, at User:BrownHairedGirl/YearInNorthernIrelandNav. To see what it looks like, take a peep at User:BrownHairedGirl/Year in NI test. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good BHG. Blue seems like a good choice. Thanks for asking. ww2censor (talk) 00:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Norrn Iron
demo of 2 colours of various shades

Yes on both counts; we need a similar template for NI if only to reward the tireless Ardfern! The Blue looks striking; far better than the pale green - but I guess we should ask the Northern members; Bastun is rarely stuck for a comment. I especially like the light blue Lough Neagh and county borders...it gives a navy/blue effect which reminds me of my adopted county; (Hint:Molly Malone). On the other hand you just might start another raging war with this one! Sarah777 (talk) 00:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eeek! If Jack had not been vacuously posturing when he said "we will not stand idly by", your map might might be useable. But since nowt happened, I think it might just be as wee but provocative to anyone who doesn't recall the border being withdrawn :)

My commiserations on your choice adopted county. From that part of the world, the signs to civilisation are spelt "N4" and "N7" :)     (I'm a refugee from Dublin, so I'm allowed to slag it a bit)

Dunno about civilization - but heaven is down the N81! Sarah777 (talk) 10:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it's heaven, you're after, go west, and get a proper Atlantic sunset. Poor old Carlow don't have no sea at all!

Though I have to confess I have fond memories of County Carlow, after a rather wonderful holiday there. We found a quiet corner on the road from nowhere to nowhere, and judging by way all the faces looked so very similar and so very Norman, no-one else had been in or out of the area for about 700 years. We had a wonderful unwind-together time, and it was a great place it for that. :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:14, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As to Ardfern, I've run out of barnstars. Any idea how to send a bottle of his favourite hooch via email? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I decided to be [[WP:BOLD}}, so I have gone ahead and moved it out of userspace (now at {{YearInNorthernIrelandNav‎}}), rolled it out on all the year in Northern Ireland articles (see e.g. 1969 in Northern Ireland), and left a note at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Northern_Ireland#Year_in_Northern_Ireland_articles. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great job BHG - have looked at 1969 - exceptionally cool. Love it - only hope our other NI punters love it too. Thanks to you and Sarah for all the kind words. No need for barnstars (although very nice to get them) - rather just get on with the work. Ardfern (talk) 20:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article has already been moved without any such request. Put it back where it was please. Sarah777 (talk) 02:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Unfortunately I can't move it back because I'm not an admin, and in any case I'm not convinced it shouldn't be the primary topic. In my opinion, your best course of action is to contact the admin who made the move (Haemo), file a move request, and/or start a discussion about whether the music style should be the primary topic on the article's talk page. Regards. --Muchness (talk) 02:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unless Haemo is an Admin not much point talking to him. Sarah777 (talk) 09:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sarah. Here's what happened and when ... - Alison ^❤ 09:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saw that. For most of its life the music article was titled Emo (music); then Emo became a dab page and just 2 days ago Heamo made the (rather obscure) music the main page with all other uses relegated. He described the move as a non-controversial move; but now only an Admin (such as yourself - extremely strong hint) can move it back to the dab page. (Btw; the fact an article cannot be moved a second time without Admin tools gives me a great idea of the WP:BEANS variety).

I think it should be moved back and then let Haemo propose making "Emo music" the clear, unambiguous primary meaning of the word. Otherwise I'll have to cut and paste again. Or think of something more inventive!Sarah777 (talk) 10:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, I didn't move the article two days ago — I moved it months ago, in October of 2007. I deleted the redirect page, after the article at Emo, which is now at Emo (disambiguation) was moved so that Emo (music) could be moved to Emo, which was an uncontroversial request made by User:Cheeser1, but which he couldn't do because he didn't have admin tools. There was no objection at the time, and this is the first objection that's been raised in the 4 months since then. --Haemo (talk) 20:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno how I missed it - not at all like me. Did you fix it yet? Sarah777 (talk) 11:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the move was consensual at the time, and I didn't really have any opinion on it even then — so I think it would be better if you discussed it on the talk page. I don't really think overturning a 4 month long consensus because of a single disagreement is the right idea — talk to the other editors, and if you get consensus for the move you can contact me, or request a move. --Haemo (talk) 17:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it worth the effort to right this manifest wrong I asked myself? And I am still awaiting a reply. Sarah777 (talk) 21:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to your comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.32.208.58 (talk) 04:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah, nice photo. --The.Q^(t)(c) 16:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tan Q!Sarah777 (talk) 11:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded - it's a lovely photo. A bit risky, surely, standing in the middle of the N4 to take the photo — I hope that Wikipedia is paying you danger money ;) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You joke?!! Actually I was on a bridge over the road! Sarah777 (talk) 18:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah777 I think you posting (Revision as of 02:40, 16 February 2008) to Talk:List_of_massacres#Alternative_names is unacceptable, please read my reply on that page,[2] and consider if you think your accusation is still appropriate. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 13:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have serious reservations with your post here. All that is going to happen when you issue ridiculous allegations like this is that you will look ridiculous and your views will not be taken into account in deciding on the article's content, something I thought you were interested in. Remember the civility parole I issued at the start of this process, and please, always comment on content and not what you imagine the contributor's motives to be. --John (talk) 17:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On reflection I want to go further, be more honest, and tell you that when I read "All I can see from John and ONIH are attempts to 'head off at the pass' any danger that their fav British/American acts of heroism in WW2 might be called massacres" I felt physically sick.

How dare you make such assumptions about my POV. Such assumptions poison the atmosphere of a discussion and make it difficult if not impossible to assume good faith of the person making them. So; on the level of your assumptions about me and my views you have once again got it completely wrong, like when you complained to Alison about me, labelling me as an "English" editor.

On the level of the article and the hard-fought compromise we have been (fairly civilly so far) working on; if you still want to have an input on the criteria for inclusion, I suggest you propose a workable solution (that is one which all parties can agree to) very soon. Failing that, I'm afraid we will move on without you. This is what happens to marginal views; they tend to get marginalised. --John (talk) 17:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I stand by my observations; that is my reading of the conversation as it developed when I was gone. I have proposed several workable solutions which have been ignored. And, as I have pointed out over and over - it is your view that is marginal. Sarah777 (talk) 15:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sarah. Thanks for taking interest in the Great Book of Lecan article I created some time ago. I noticed you changed the date from a year to a range. Given he antiquity of the subject matter, I don't doubt that we can't pin down when it was written. Although you may have made the article more accurate, your addition is unsourced. Can you please source your addendum? Thanks and best wishes. --House of Scandal (talk) 19:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi House, I was a bit bold and used material from another Wiki article - Uí Fiachrach. It gave the range 1397 - 1418 and that seemed more likely than the single date; it also had information about the commissioning. Regards Sarah777 (talk) 20:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since BHG doesn't seem to have the time, I opened Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 February 18#(Some) Years in Ireland categories. If you think it's worth posting at the WikiProject Ireland page, let me know. Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, im from Cahir (obviously by my username!). I saw you edited the cahir page. I only joined wikipedia last week, so can you give me some tips? Thanks. PROUD CAHIR BOY 1 (talk) 20:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There don't seem to be many Irish articles hitting the front page, so I am trying to get some of my recent creations into Did you know? box on the front page. The two suggestions which I have made at T:TDYK are Fintan "Lazarus" Coogan and Pól "20 press-ups" Ó Foighil.

Fingers crossed :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yer man Conormcgarry moved your original article but didn't move the talk. Are you able to fix? Albatross2147 (talk) 06:18, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. I think you need to be an Admin to fix that up. I see Conor is starting a series on Dublin Bus routes - I wish him luck when the deletionists get their rotten claws into that! Sarah777 (talk) 07:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sarah777, how are ya doing. GoodDay (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moderately well considering! Sarah777 (talk) 07:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice, Cheers. GoodDay (talk) 21:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This table automatically updated itself; see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Ireland articles by quality log for details of the latest changes. Current and past versions of this table (July 2007-present) are stored at User:Ww2censor/Assessments Sarah777 (talk) 22:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wish that Category:Unknown-importance Ireland articles was less than 5,000-strong! :( --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Ireland/Assessment#Importance.3DNA_now_has_a_different_effect. A template tweak should reduce the numbers! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. Tyrenius (talk) 02:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed two posts you made[3] on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres (2nd nomination) per WP:BLP. If you wish to comment, do so without making derogatory comments about other people. Tyrenius (talk) 03:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah, that's more than enough. I've blocked you for 24 hours for this comment which was completely out of order. Nobody should have to put up with that sort of abuse - Alison ^❤ 15:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Review admins, please also see Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/The_Troubles/Enforcement_requests#User:Sarah777 - Alison ^❤ 15:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock me at once Ali. It was not out of order. The remarks deleted by Tyranious were NOT out of order but were an EXACT response to the type of remarks Fozzie (on your page which you ignored) and John whenb he attacked me recently made. But Admins support Admins don't they? When some of you guys stop abusing your power and stop being uncivil yourselves you can expect something better than richly deserved contempt. This is a TOTALLY biased, unfair and illigitimate block and I demand it be lifted NOW; expunged from the record and an apology made by you. The block review process is a sick joke as I have found when subject to what were later admitted to be abuse of Admin power - some Admin glances at the comments he is directed to and confirms it. So Ali, I am asking you - and nobody else - to remove this block. Pronto. Given what you have just done, btw, you merit no politness (to put it at its mildest) while this block stands. Sarah777 (talk) 15:51, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No doubt heartened by having got Vk etc you are hoping to provoke me into some (absolutely understandable) reaction that will allow the PURGE to continue. (And didn't I get that right??!). If you do as you did the last time and block this page I will change IP and openly sign my comments - but I will not be silenced by a bunch of self-important control-freaks who reckon being 'uncivil' to one of their tribe own is the greatest offence on Wiki. Sarah777 (talk) 15:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah, I'm not undoing your block any time soon. On the contrary. Not only was I, once again, foolishly pleading your case, you had to go and prove me wrong by doing what you did. And once again, when you get called on it, you begin blustering (see above) and claiming Admin Abuse™. Well, nobody gets to behave like that to anybody else and you're constantly at it. The block stays and I will not be lifting it. Feel free to request unblock from another, random admin however - Alison ^❤ 17:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will not, for the reasons I have clearly stated. And blustering I most certainly am NOT. That was a pretty limp 'defense' btw. You are rather more focused in your attacks. Sarah777 (talk) 17:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is the most informed forum to address the completely unacceptable harassment in these posts. [15][16] It is time to stop tolerating such behaviour from anyone. This user has been adequately warned and continues to be a disruptive presence:Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Sarah777 and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Great Irish Famine. -- Tyrenius (talk) 02:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Firstly - this had NOTHING to do with "The Troubles" and shouldn't be here. If you had banned the various abusive uncivil Admins I've encountered you might have some case - but you (plural) never do. And you and people like you Tyrenius can rant about what you will tolerate etc all you want, but what you are doing is simple bullying. The remarks you removed were fully appropriate to the way John was beheaving; constantly repeating that there was "consensus" where manifestly there was none. He completely abused his position in relation to "massacres"; refused to engage or defend his decision but merely repeated parrot-like in a condescending arrogant tone that there "was consensus"; as if repitition made it so. Then he interprets my equally constant contradictions of his LIE as "harrassment". How neat. And of course his fellow Admins (some of them) agree that "nobody (meaning:no Admin) should have to put up with that". Oh dear! How thoughtful are we Admins towards our own feelings - such touching empathy. Interestingly; all bar one of these abusive blocks have been for incivility to AN ADMIN. And the single block not for hurting some insulting Admin's feelings was an accidental 3RR. Sarah777 (talk) 16:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Tyrenius, but I cannot see any harassment in those two diffs. Incivility, perhaps, but please can you explain why you see those two comments as harrassment? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:26, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

This is an ongoing thing because the consensus went against her at Talk:List of massacres. Thanks Tyrenius for removing the derogatory comments; let me be clear that I do regard this kind of thing as harassment and would like to see something done about it. Sarah needs to learn how to disagree without it becoming a vendetta each time. --John (talk) 04:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

THERE WAS NO CONSENSUS; THERE WAS NO CONSENSUS; THERE WAS NO CONSENSUS - you arrogant blimp. You keep repeating that YOUR decision is consensus; and when I keep replying that it isn't - poor little John whines "harrassment". EVERY time you lie and state that there was "consensus" I will point out that there ISN'T. Period. Sarah777 (talk) 16:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I personally don't see them as "harassment". Unfortunately, it's a rather overused and much blunted term on WP. Incivility, yes. Rudeness, probably. Harassment, no - Alison ❤ 04:50, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I beg to differ. To me it is a textbook example of "Targeted personal attacks: Not all personal attacks are harassment, but when an editor engages in repeated personal attacks on a particular editor or group of editors, that's another matter." I can dig out diffs for you if you like but this editor has made a disproportionate amount of nippy comments about me recently. It does begin to feel like harassment. Of course YMMV. --John (talk) 04:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

So. John threatens to block me (alone) on the "Massacres" list; then declares a 'consensus' where none exists; then keeps repeating that lie over and over to which I keep replying (with some rather telling analogies in the last case) and my replies to his bull become "hassessment". I would suggest that it is about as far from a classic case of harressment as one can get. But it is a classic case of double-standards and Admin abuse. Sarah777 (talk) 16:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm. It's obviously quite upsetting to you and it's been going on some time now. We all kinda know what Sarah is like re. admins, though, but that's no excuse. Ty beat me to it and removed the comments with a warning. Trouble is, if you try something like civility parole, a certain someone will likely call it "censorship". What to do ... - Alison ❤ 05:11, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

This one really takes the biscuit! "quite upsetting". And having an biased Admin come in and dictate POV in an article I have been trying to rid of POV for months isn't? And yes, I will have nothing to do with "civility parole" unless I can put at least half-a-dozen Admins on it; starting with John. Sarah777 (talk) 16:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly frustrating. I'm happy with Ty's actions there for now; I have a lot of respect for Sarah's passion but her sniping on the list of massacres article, which Rock asked me to look in on, is getting wearing, as I mentioned a few days ago. I hope she will focus on harmonious editing from now on; I don't come here to be spoken to that way. Thanks for commenting. --John (talk) 07:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Not half as "wearing" as your invention of 'consensus' and repeated proclamation of it which necessitates the "sniping" (aka - replying) Sarah777 (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is harassment per Wikipedia:HAR#Targeted_personal_attacks: Targeted personal attacks: Not all personal attacks are harassment, but when an editor engages in repeated personal attacks on a particular editor or group of editors, that's another matter. However, it doesn't matter what it is called, it is still unacceptable. It is a breach of WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL, which are policies. It is demoralising and humiliating for an editor to be subjected to this kind of abuse. We have come down hard on other breaches of policy re sockpuppeting, and the air seems rather clearer as a result. There is no reason to treat this case any differently. There is no reason to exercise restraint, because it's going to be called "censorship": that would be giving in to emotional blackmail. Many people who transgress throw counter-accusations to get themselves off the hook. It doesn't work like that. Abusive comments about other editors poison the atmosphere and do not address the issues. There is no excuse for them, especially with consistent offenders, which Sarah 777 is. I suggest a one week block in the first instance, with increasing lengths for further offences. That is better than doing nothing for a year and then imposing a community ban when it gets unbearable. Tyrenius (talk) 14:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thus speaks the bully; and such garbage he utters. Based on the rant above Tyranius should be relieved of his tools immediately as he is obviously totally unfit to be an Admin. "Many people who transgress throw counter-accusations to get themselves off the hook." Do they? I'm not on any hook; I am the subject of Admin abuse of power. Simple. Sarah777 (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The comments on Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 February 18 are worth looking at as well. One Night In Hackney303 14:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Remarks by Sarah777 from the above deletion review discussion:

Could this be related to the involvement of some editors in "an article I couldn't give a sh*t about" (List of massacres) by some Anglo editors, one wonders?[17]

   [NB change from "English" to "Anglo"]

Wow! The quote was from something YOU posted ONIH. And the question was a rather relevent one. I suggest you involved yourself in opposition to me (part of John's "consensus of three") because of disagreements we had on earlier articles. I still think that, btw. And you have now again involved yourself in opposition to me on "years in Ireland"; another set of articles you were completely uninvolved in and have contributed zilch to - until you spotted a dispute.

I also (personal view) think there is an element of typical British anti-Irishness involved here; the nationality of most of those attacking the project is very clear.[18]

Tyrenius (talk) 15:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Given the nature of many of the comments made in the "years in Ireland" case that is a pretty reasonable suspicion to have. Sarah777 (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The first part of the initial comment is dubious too - "typical deletionist nonsense. This is an attack on the work of the productive editors by the bureaucrats". One Night In Hackney303 15:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

In what way is a true statement dubious? Sarah777 (talk) 17:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah777's response on my talk page: "Kindly sod off."[19] Tyrenius (talk) 15:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Rather less than you deserve ||||

... and blocked for 24 hours. That's more than enough - nobody needs to put up with that sort of abuse - Alison ❤ 15:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Shucks - you move me to tears of pity for the poor harrassed Admins; you really do. Try being blocked by an abusive Admin if words upset you so - nobody needs to put up with that sort of abuse either. I which is worse do you think? Sarah777 (talk) 17:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is worth a look too - under a heading of "Another daft decision" she said "PSB, I see you moved "football" in Ireland to some weird name rather than to a disamb page as was the clear consensus on the matter. Have you ever made a sensible call as an Admin? Please reverse this asinine decision". One Night In Hackney303 15:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Another decision taken without consensus. Outrageous actually. Sarah777 (talk) 17:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/The_Troubles/Enforcement_requests"

This page was last modified on 23 February 2008, at 16:44. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.) Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity.

"Another daft decision" Sarha777 I have no idea what you are talking about. Please show me with a link to the edit you accusing me of altering. I made this move but I did not edit football in the Republic of Ireland [4]--Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 17:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into your case Philip. If I find I was over-hasty I will as always, and utterly unlike abusive Admins, admit my mistake and apologise. Right now I have a photo to add to this page. Sarah777 (talk) 17:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then Sarah I look forward to you retraction of the comment you put on Talk:list of massacres (now archived Talk:list of massacres/Archive 5#Alternative_names ) as I bought it to you attention with this edit to your talk page --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 19:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd recommend that the Sarah VS the Troubles committee go to Arbitration. GoodDay (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should go somehwere because I thought, oddly enough, that the "Troubles" arbitration was to do with Troubles-related issues. It now appears it is a Kangaroo Court for any non-forelock tugging Irish Editor in relation to any topic or dispute. Sarah777 (talk) 00:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also Sarah, you should give out apologies to those who feel harrassed by you. GoodDay (talk) 18:50, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: the 'cave man image' is a knee slapper. GoodDay (talk) 21:02, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It's awesome! - Alison ^❤ 21:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• See the Pharisees are at heel. Long live love and freedom of speech. Demise to censorship and repression. ;~)) 22:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.19.73.33 (talk)

I only wish they were at heel. More like freedom of speech is under their heels. I see PSB is queuing up his apology demands - really better look into that. But as for "you should give out apologies to those who feel harrassed by you"; I will when either (a) they stop harrassing and blocking me or (b) hell freezes over - whichever comes first. Sarah777 (talk) 00:04, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, just a suggestion. Here's hoping things will smooth out. GoodDay (talk) 00:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meant to say, "nipping your heels". You don't realise the satisfaction that children get playing "policeman". It used to be "cowboys", but it's all changed this last few years. They would love someone to say the "f*** ***" words. But then I saw it used last week, and do you know? Nothing happened!! 78.19.73.33 (talk) 00:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, something would happen quick enough if I did - but then I'm not on the Central Committee. Thanx GoodDay; but I only apologise when I am wrong; never just to make peace. Sarah777 (talk) 00:38, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sarah, see what Ali is up to!! [5] Oh Dear!!! 78.19.73.33 (talk) 01:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that it's Allie, not Ali. Both Sarah and Foz get that wrong all the time. Also, it's admin, not Admins :) - Alison ^❤ 01:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I reckon Ali, that to me and Foz we must now add 78197333 then? Sarah777 (talk) 01:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

... or Fozzie :) I suspect the latter - Alison ^❤ 01:50, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Foz here Ali. How did you guess? Pretty sharp!! Eh....!! 78.19.73.33 (talk) 01:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem.. *gets out the banhammer and starts taking some menacing practice swings*.. you want to try again? SirFozzie (talk) 04:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As one who often drank with Brendan Behan's brother, Dominic Behan, the Vintagekits dispute has nothing to do with Britain or Ireland, or the Troubles for that matter. Unfortunately some of the Admins have made that connection. I don't know what Vintagekits politics are, and I don't give two "knackers". Strange how all this is being shoveled up again, when it was supposed to be in the past. Vintage is blocked for voting with a sock. I think the troubles are over in Northern Ireland, Wikipedia take note! 78.19.73.33 (talk) 01:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

   Hi, Sarah! :) - Alison ❤ 01:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC) 

Yep. She thinks you are me obviously! Sarah777 (talk) 01:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, not me - though I guess by saying earlier in a call for registration that someone could easily be framed I may have given someone ideas! If your check-user thingy concluded that 'twas I 'tis time to bin it. Remember Derova? But if you are just having a guess isn't that a bit dangerous? I said if I changed IP to get around restrictions I'd sign my name. My page wasn't blocked and I haven't changed my location; still plugged to the same socket with an uncloaked IP. What if instead of making a few helpful comments my new friend 78.19.73.33 made a few threats or changed a few "troubles" articles? Not funny. But I don't blame 78197333, I blame The Committee. Sarah777 (talk) 01:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And the rumours about Dominic and I are untrue :) Sarah777 (talk) 01:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser didn't say any such thing, as it happens. What has The Committee got to do with it, though? - Alison ^❤ 01:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom?! Nothing. I refer to the Central Committee of the Soviet Communist Party Wiki Establishment Party who are conducting this PURGE. Sarah777 (talk) 01:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Are you or have you ever been ...." :) - Alison ^❤ 02:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This won't help you either, not when Ali is about! ;~)) 78.19.73.33 (talk) 02:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lol - I so don't look anything like that. Besides, I got the Joe Mc Carthy ref in first! BTW - Sarah, I've a question I've been meaning to ask. Dunno if now is appropriate, though, given the circumstances :o - Alison ^❤ 02:17, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unless it involves revealing my identity in public I answer ALL questions. Sarah777 (talk) 02:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An bhfuil aon Gaeilge ar bith agat? - Alison ^❤ 02:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beagán. I can speak it pretty OK as I went to a Gealscoil but couldn't write in it to save my life. Even in speech the old vocabulary is a bit reduced but it comes back wiith exposure; like riding a bike. Céin fáth a bhfuil tú ag askall an ceist sin? Agus mise so bprisoon? Sarah777 (talk) 02:34, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the reason I ask (and had been meaning to) is because when enwiki gets too much for me, I usually head over here or here, where things are much more serene and I can contribute without any drama or politics. Just thought you might be interested, too, is all. You don't have to have perfect Gaeilge or anything. Our towns and counties need a lot of attention, esp. in the photos department. Just a suggestion, mind :) - Alison ^❤ 03:58, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go n-ithe an cat thú, Ali, is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat. 78.19.73.33 (talk) 02:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go bhfóire Déithe orainn!! - Alison ^❤ 03:58, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Careful Sarah!! Make sure it's germane!! She'll fling it at you later :~))) 78.19.73.33 (talk) 02:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if I posted in Irish I'd leave such a plethora of poor spelling etc that she could match me up with anyone! Sarah777 (talk) 02:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Are you sure you are Fozzie? A pest certainly :) Sarah777 (talk) 02:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A pest? I have just thought up a new game to play. It's called, Spot the Real Pest. A real "no-brainer". 78.19.73.33 (talk) 02:26, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just outed a few real ones and got blocked as a reward. Sarah777 (talk) 02:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And yes - they were certainly no-brainers! Sarah777 (talk) 02:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! 78.19.73.33 (talk) 03:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK Philip; in your case and in your case only it appears I was utterly totally and abysmally wrong in both cases. I hereby retract and apologise for misreading your "Football" edit" and please point me to the spot where you'd like me to deposit an equally grovelling retraction and apology for accusing you of tinkering with the 1641 article. I promise to read your edits more carefully in future before commenting on them. Fuirthermore I must record that you sometimes do make good decisions contrary to what may have appeared to be implied in one of my remarks above. Needless to say I was being a bit caustic rather than literal. Sarah777 (talk) 00:16, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Sarah777 as far as I am concerned these two issues are now closed, and I look forward to cooperating with you on editing articles in the future. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 02:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thankls Philip. I'm taking a short Wiki-break right now though. Sarah777 (talk) 02:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit, and the other edits in the current AfD towards John - the phrase I think is "comment on content, not the contributor" - that is, the remarks are uncivil and you should be more careful about violating WP:NPA. Avruch ^T 03:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have a link missing Avruch. I think I have made my views on John's comments (endlessly repeated comments) pretty clear. As for John himself I know little about him other than what he chooses to reveal here. Sarah777 (talk) 15:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair points, which I will digest. But I must also point out to you that I can only go by what I read on your page. It's all very depressing, and maybe very shallow too!! It wasn't so much your comments, but comments by others, that you accepted as fact. That also was depressing. 78.19.73.33 (talk) 02:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Without making any comment on my new friend 78197333s views as expressed here I feel I must point out that contrary to some speculation I have no connection whatsoever with the esteemed IP. But this appears to rule Fozzie out, I would think. Sarah777 (talk) 02:58, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not me. I'm taking the most parts of a wikibreak. (Too much arguing and snapping at other people, thanks to an ongoing ArbCom case) Well, I'm mostly sure it's not me.. there's been some moments where I can't quite remember what I've done.... Nah.. couldn't be :) SirFozzie (talk) 04:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, that IP (78.19.73.33) is Irish, as in Ireland... SirFozzie (talk) 04:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't mean a lot; if my main PC hadn't just croaked last night I could have pulled an IP from anywhere out of the drawer; even the UK. And you hardened check-user types would know all about that now wouldn't ya Foz?! :-) Sarah777 (talk) 15:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(sticks out tounge :P,) that's all I have to say Sarah :) SirFozzie (talk) 16:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vintagekits is gone, they finally drove him demented, and now this [6]. Do you notice a pattern. Same heads looming, they need a prey. Look at them! - Tyrenius, Rockpocket, John, SirFozzie, Alison, GoodDay, One Night In Hackney, BrownHairedGirl. Someone recently predicted this. Who will be after you. They don't give "two knackers" about your 20,000 good edits. Is Wikipedia worth this bs? 78.19.2.57 (talk) 00:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

78.19.2.57/Gold heart, please remove my name from your list. I've not called for Sarah to be blocked or banned. GoodDay (talk) 17:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed by checkuser that 78.19.xx.xx is the banned editor Gold heart (talk). I should have seen this and checked sooner. Sorry about all the hassle, Sarah - Alison ^❤ 01:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And, maybe you know, Sarah, but I'm not "after you". I've been fighting your corner for some time. Had I not blocked your a/c yesterday, be assured that someone else was ready and it wouldn't have been for 24 hours. Sorry again :( - Alison ^❤ 02:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sarah, I got an email to look at this page. It's not Gold heart. And Allie, I won't eat your 'sand-witches', maybe later;) . Looks like a Salaam wit-chunt, or is it witchunt, or witchhunt, whatever ;)) First cut is the deepest. 86.43.121.108 (talk) 16:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go away, GH, it *is* you. Checkuser was pretty conclusive. Welcome back to your Eircom range, BTW. "Email" indeed :( - Alison ^❤ 19:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Sarah! How pronounce in the name town Listowel 2 letter "OW". Like in "Tow" or like in "Towel". (Прон) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.126.214.103 (talk) 15:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you dont mind me jumping in but in Dublin we pronounce it like LIS TOE EL might be different in other parts of Ireland. BigDunc (talk) 15:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, BigDunc. (Прон) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.126.214.103 (talk) 21:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GH, I read the comments and have replied on that page. It seems to escape the attention of so many esteemed (in their own minds) Admins that this current "dispute" is not a "troubles" related issue. So it can't be me v. some "troubles" monitoring group. And I cannot believe John's claims of bemusement at why I have an issue with him when I have given the reason so often I'm being accused of "harassment". Believe me, being threatened by Admins with blocking power who are edit-warring (a near daily occurrence for me), THAT is harassment. Spare me your sensitivity to my screaming while you gouge my eyes out. Sarah777 (talk) 20:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And a routine denial; I am not GH. The reason I remain so confident that no check will catch me isn't hubris - simply that there is nothing to catch. Sarah777 (talk) 20:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GH is more than familiar with the concept of harassment. That's why he's back here. That's why he's emailing again. And on it goes ... :( - Alison ^❤ 03:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As of now he can't email me! The Great Crash of last weekend leaves me without a mail program; I know it's a cinch to reset - but it involves phoning the Eircom Helpline. Sarah777 (talk) 21:54, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aw sheet! Please GH - you wouldn't like me when I'm cross. Sarah777 (talk) 21:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Thedjatclubrock :) ^(T/C) 02:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No...you got the right address. But you leave me bruised and battered, washed up on the shore - deflated, distressed, despairing and lots of other dark dank dreary dismal things beginning with "d". Sarah777 (talk) 03:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How Sarah, how ye? I've read a million of your edits so I'd like to discuss a few things if you don't mind.

(A) Indepenent Northern Ireland (from both the Republic and the UK), what would be your thoughts on this?

(B) Britain as an ancient description, as in Brythonic?

167.1.176.4 (talk) 08:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Firstly let me say I'm glad you asked me that. An independent NI (so long as Queenie isn't head of state) - excellent idea. I have long believed it is equally wrong to force the Nationalist population into Britain or force the Unionist population into Eire. And I guess an increasing number of Northern Nationalists and Unionists have more in common with each other than with Britain or the Free State. Secondly, "Brythonic" may be an ancient term but 'tis new to me. I'll just have to plead rampant ignorance on that one. Sarah777 (talk) 21:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just suffered a 24 hour block (which I managed to get lifted) for being disruptive in Years in Ireland. See my talk page - makes you glad to be a part of this. Ardfern (talk) 22:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting more and more like some institution run by a cult of abusers. 40k edits in "main"; not a single cross word ever uttered - and you get blocked. At least I put myself about as they say; there is simply NO valid excuse for blocking you no matter what self-serving rationalisation the fascists come up with. Plus, the block is totally illegitimate as you are using an undeleted system of categorisation. Sarah777 (talk) 22:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I note that there was no valid warning either. I presume Alison and Fozzie will now wake-up and smell what is going on here? Sarah777 (talk) 22:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alison saw your revert and is just about ready to quit the project, truth be known - Alison ^❤ 22:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heck Ali - my revert was because I thought GH's post was totally inappropriate and perhaps intimidating - it was absolutely not directed at you! Sarah777 (talk) 22:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, and my comment was not as a result of your action at all. Your thoughts were exactly right, IMO - Alison ^❤ 22:40, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank God for that! Don't be intimidated; sticks and stones etc. You should see some of the mail I get from my Wiki-fans!!! Sarah777 (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah, please don't refer to other editors, named or implied, as "fascists". In addition to being wholly incorrect, it is also gratuitously offensive and likely to earn you a block yourself for WP:NPA before too long. How many times do you need to be asked - make your point without resorting to name-calling, please. Rockpocket 23:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have thought it was a pretty good description. Don't you? And if some goon can block Ardfern then we should all be proud to be blocked, don't you think? And I reckon we'd be rather more interested in your take on the Ardfern block than on my civility (yaaaaaawn!) Sarah777 (talk) 23:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And btw, how do I go about asking that certain editors be relieved of Adminship? (This is a serious question). I have a list. You ain't on it. Yet. Sarah777 (talk) 23:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Requests for de-adminship. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ardfern has been unblocked, since he has now agreed to discontinue the categorization that the admin considered to be disruptive or pointy. If you consider that to be a misuse of tools, then I would suggest you politely explain your opinion to admin involved (without name calling) and ask about his reasoning. If that is not satisfactory, you could (politely) request a review at AN, or else open a (polite) RfC. I, personally, recommend editors follow that process of they have a concern with my use of tools, yet oddly not one has taken up that invitation, instead they seem to refer to call me names (and then wonder why no-one takes them seriously). Some admins are also listed at WP:RECALL. If you go through that process, I will be happy to offer my opinion on Ardfern's block.

I'm glad I am not on your "list", but expect I will be before too long unless you begin to appreciate that there is no excuse for name calling. I will not ask politely again: "fascist," "goon" or any other taunt is not acceptable language when referring to another editor. You are walking a fine line. Stop it now, please. Rockpocket 23:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Ty makes another abusive block 'cos I am about to demand his recall. How do I do that now???? Sarah777 (talk) 00:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And Sorry Rock. No can do, as you see Admin-power abusing fascists like friend Ty. When I see you jump on folk who are calling me names, then maybe I start to listen to you. I guess you know by now that threats (aka 'warnings', are water off the duck-back to me). So, do you reckon Ty is right to abuse his power in a personal dispute? If not - unblock. Sarah777 (talk) 00:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that her block be reviewed:

Sarah777 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I've just been blocked by an Admin that I have been engaged in a series of disputes with and whom I had listed for recall just before the block. Frankly if that isn't gross abuse of Admin tools nothing is.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I've just been blocked by an Admin that I have been engaged in a series of disputes with and whom I had listed for recall just ''before'' the block. Frankly if that isn't gross abuse of Admin tools '''nothing''' is.  |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I've just been blocked by an Admin that I have been engaged in a series of disputes with and whom I had listed for recall just ''before'' the block. Frankly if that isn't gross abuse of Admin tools '''nothing''' is.  |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I've just been blocked by an Admin that I have been engaged in a series of disputes with and whom I had listed for recall just ''before'' the block. Frankly if that isn't gross abuse of Admin tools '''nothing''' is.  |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

How dare you remove my 'unblock' request. Sarah777 (talk) 00:35, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do not remove my post which is relevant to your unblock request. As you can see[8] I was restoring your unblock request when there was a ec. Tyrenius (talk) 00:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Prime. These are the Admins I wish to remove:

• Tyrenius
• Fram
• Ioeth
• SirFozzie (with some sadness)

Sarah777 (talk) 23:58, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]