Welcome to my talk page. For ease of reading, if you leave a message here I'll reply here unless you request otherwise. If I leave a message on your page I'll be watching it for a while, so feel free to reply there. Please include a link to the article in question, and sign your comments by typing four tildes (~~~~).

Hello, Blisco, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up very shortly to answer your questions. Don't be afraid to ask!
If you would like to experiment with Wikipedia, I invite you to do so in my own personal sandbox (just follow the simple rules!) or in the Wikipedia sandbox.
When you contribute on talk pages or in other areas, it is important to sign your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date.

Again, welcome! — ßottesiηi ^{Tell me what's up} 19:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's good to see that someone knowledgeable is looking through the pronunciations for the Scottish hills and mountains. Keep it up! Oh, and thanks for changing the slashes to square brackets; I knew I'd done something wrong there, but I wasn't sure how to correct it. --Stemonitis 10:02, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re your comment on my talk, I partially used www.munromagic.com, where they have a speaker you can listen to plus my own very very poor knowledge of Gaelic pronunciations. Grinner 18:40, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's really useful, thanks. With that site and this chart I should be able to manage most of them. Blisco 20:03, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I de-speedied the article after discussing with the creator. He made some changes I suggested to avoid the appearance of vanity or commercial exploitation. . (It is now too late for a speedy. )

I think it now has sufficient merit to keep based on “Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia“. However, he may not meet notability as an author Wikipedia:Notability (people)-- “Published authors, editors and photographers who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work .” I get about 2,000 google hits. I don't know if he has sufficent reviews or not. I'm not sure that the article would survive an AFD. You could AfD the thing, but I don’t feel strongly the need to get rid of it. Cheers,  :) Dlohcierekim 00:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed Northumerland back to Northumbria. It is not correct correct to say that the Northumbrian Smallpipe is primarily played in Northumberland. Northumbria and Northumberland are different places. Northumbria includes many places including Northumberland. I live in Sunderland and know of Smallpipe players. Also Sting uses the smallpipe in his Fields of Gold song. He was born in Newcastle which is not in Northumberland. The name is Northumbrian Smallpipes, not Northumberland Smallpipes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eponymous one (talk • contribs) 17:38, 28 May 2006

The description of Oxford you deleted in the Cotswolds article is pretty standard isn't it (even if it makes the occupants of Fenlandia gag). Perhaps we could look to reinstate it with a qualification? Linuxlad 21:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the rail atlases I have to hand, the station name was Cockermouth in 1890, but Cockermouth for Buttermere in 1955. I don't know when it change, but I've left the station name as you edited it, i.e. Cockermouth. I have, however, removed the link to the town - I'll be creating a page for the railway station in the near future, and this will link to the town.--Tivedshambo 16:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that would make sense - a case of promotional naming along the lines of Oxenholme Lake District I suppose. I'm afraid that was something of a rash edit on my part, based on assumption rather than hard fact, so thanks for picking up the pieces. --Blisco 17:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Murdos you have already mentioned in the article, legit source.

The Corbett Tops are hills in Scotland between 2500ft and 3000ft with 30m drop; they can be found at this website. I think the list was compiled by Clem Clements.

The Graham Tops are hills in Scotland between 2000ft and 2500ft with 30m drop. They can only be accessed if you become a member of the rhb group - given your CV you would probably benefit from doing so. If / when you become a member, look at this page for the complete Graham Tops list.

Glad I can help. --Mark J 17:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mark. While these are all published sources of a kind (though I'm not sure if the RHB group is admissible), it looks as if the complete list of Scottish Hewitt-status hills qualifies as new analysis or synthesis of published data and is therefore ineligible for Wikipedia. We can report on lists that have already been published, but not make up new ones of our own, even if they are simply existing lists joined together. Interesting stuff though! -- Blisco 19:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The trouble is that there ARE lots of other possibilities for FRCC - which will duly arrive now that there is a stub. So I think it's best to recognise that and have a disambig forn the beginning.

I'll come back to you on the climbing - it's a typical mish-mash of an overlong article IMHO, but I don't know whether I've got wit enough to help :-( Bob aka Linuxlad 12:41, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read: MediaWiki_talk:Edittools.Cygnus_hansa 13:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see you removed reference to the name "Charles Quint," saying, "delete irrelevant sentence - Charles Quint is just his French title." I know that this is what he is referred to as in French, but a) he is also sometimes called this in English, especially when spoken of; and b) it's not obvious why this title is particularly French. "Charles Cinq" or "Charles le Cinquième" would seem like the French version of "Charles V." "Quint" seems to be an archaism which is normally used in French only for Charles V. (The example given for the meaning of "Quint" in French in the wordreference dictionary is a sentence about Charles V.) Also, French was his native language. The use of "Charles Quint" seems to be fairly ubiquitous (there's a beer called "Charles Quint," for instance, and a tennis club in Brussels), and I don't see why it's not worth mentioning. john k 21:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in replying - I've put it back with an appropriate qualifier. I'm still not convinced it's used that much in English; a Google search mostly yields pages related to the Low Countries that have quite possibly been influenced by the name of the beer! Interesting about the usage in French though, I hadn't considered that. --Blisco 09:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re your suggestion of merging Islands of the North Atlantic with British Isles (terminology) the answer is an unambuguous No. Not a chance. IONA is a widely used term. If there is an article on British Isles then there has to be an article on IONA. It is a standard term used internationally. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 17:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll repeat that Wikipedia is not a dictionary. "Islands of the North Atlantic" and "British Isles" are just 2 different terms that different people use to denote the same island group. The Wikipedia article on that island group, for better or for worse, is called British Isles. The only justification for having a separate article is if there's too much information on the term "Islands of the North Atlantic" to include in either British Isles or British Isles (terminology) without overbalancing either article. My opinion is that there isn't, as I tend to favour long and comprehensive articles over short and insubstantial ones, but others may disagree; that's what we ought to be debating. If we have a separate article for each widely used term with political overtones, shouldn't Falkland Islands and Malvinas, or Northern Ireland and North of Ireland, be separated? --Blisco 18:09, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blisco,

I've commented on your move of Galicia (autonomous community)...

Thanks for taking the trouble to let me know; I see the distinction you make (which I unwittingly overlooked) and have added my thoughts to the talk page section. Yours, David 23:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a big fan of user boxes but I can't see a category of walking/hiking or whatever Wikipedians. Thought you might have a view - sorry if it is of no interest to you --Nigel ^(Talk) 12:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK - no worries - found it, just wasn't where I thought it would be - regards --Nigel ^(Talk) 12:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to propose a merger of Snowdonia and Snowdonia National Park (which pair had been bugging me for a while) when I found that you'd already done it. Good work! --Stemonitis 18:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:AWainwright.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found myself thinking about this overnight, and I don't think it's true that Tryfan "is the only mountain on the British mainland, and the only one in the United Kingdom outside the Isle of Skye, that requires scrambling … to reach the summit" [1]. Should this perhaps be the only 3,000 foot mountain to require scrambling? Because otherwise, don't at least Ben Arthur (The Cobbler) and Helm Crag also pass that criterion? --Stemonitis 07:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, I'd forgotten about them -- probably because many people reckon the top rocks "don't count", and that they've bagged the peak if they get to the bottom of them. How about "the only mountain whose ascent requires sustained scrambling", in the "Ascent routes" section with explanation? --Blisco 18:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Sustained scrambling" would make sense. And anyone who claims the bottom of the rock is the top needs to think it over again, in my opinion… --Stemonitis 08:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where does that leave the In Pin on Skye now that it has a bridge...yes, I know this is getting into contentious ground but to me, a bridge or tunnel does change the whole nature of what constitutes the mainland and islands. A bridge is a man made link, but you cant argue with it...some islands are disconnected by tides, some (like Seil) by tiny wee bridges, some by causeways. There is no intrinsic difference between a man made link and one created by an accident of geology, a landslide or silt perhaps. Man is part of the forces of nature.

You can free climb the In Pin quite easily if you have a good head for heights. The summit of Tryfan can be reached...just about, without using your hands...tricky, but possible. Excalibur 22:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My comment may have been unsourced, but so is the whole article at Stroud! I won't reinsert it, but -- as you are a resident and I'm not -- perhaps you might have more ideas than I do about how to draw attention to Stroud's distinctive nature. It is much more well-known than other towns of its size (e.g. Dunblane). Not to mention that is like saying The Today Programme is a radio show -- those who haven't heard of it won't realise from that brief mention how influential it is. Unsourced, yes, but unjustified? BrainyBabe 20:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly most of the article is unsourced, but most of it is at least verifiable (I won't say all). I think my main problem with your addition was peacock terms: "punches above its weight in terms of its cultural clout and presence in the popular imagination" doesn't really tell you anything about the place -- it's far more encyclopedic to say why it's important. More importantly, it's virtually impossible to verify that a place is better known than other places of the same size, unless surveys have been done.

I certainly see your point however -- the article doesn't really do enough to explain why Stroud is distinctive, though the bit beginning "Visitors and locals say that there is a unique and 'laid back' air to the town" is a start. Perhaps you would be able to quantify why you think it punches above its weight? How about "it is noted for its alternative and laid-back atmosphere" in the lead section? Which is probably a better claim to fame than steep streets and cafe culture, at least. Of course it should still be supported by a reference ideally, but there's a better chance of finding one. --Blisco 22:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a pleased visitor rather than a committed and knowledgeable local, I'll have to leave this question to others. "Stroud is noted for..." and "Visitors and locals say..." are not exactly hard data, but in many cases impressons like these are all that there realistically is to go on. BrainyBabe 15:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually quite new to Stroud, so don't overestimate my knowledge! "People say there is a unique atmosphere to the town" is at least verifiable in a way that "Stroud has an above-average presence in popular imagination" isn't really, though of course it would sound much better as "well-known travel writer X said bla bla bla". Hmm, I wonder if Bill Bryson has been here? --Blisco 20:15, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I notice you reverted the anon user's edits re the "common misconception" about Ben Nevis being the highest mountain in the UK. Must admit I saw that and was slightly surprised to find out there was a 3000m mountain in the UK!! You are correct of course with this; however, his other edit that the Ben is the highest in the British Isles, is technically correct. As the British Isles is more geographically significant than the UK in terms of natural features, I wonder if that part of his edit should stand? Regards, Halsteadk 19:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to avoid using the term 'British Isles' on Wikipedia where possible, as it is somewhat contentious in certain quarters. See the article for the reason why, or explore the many pages of Talk:British Isles if you've got a spare week or two! I don't have any problem with the term myself, and agree that the British Isles are more significant than the UK in geographical terms, but "United Kingdom" has the advantage of being a sovereign state, well known worldwide, unambiguous and not subject to neutrality disputes. It's a fair bet that if "British Isles" remained in the article it wouldn't be long before someone came along and changed it to "Great Britain" or even "Britain and Ireland". Come to think of it there are probably those who would claim (especially on the aforementioned talk page) that South Georgia is "a British Isle"... --Blisco 21:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Blisco, I see your point! Halsteadk 21:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What a lot of turkeys! (Not you Halsteadk! See below.) I just had a look at my old chum Ben Nevis. I have two suggestions and a question.

Suggestion 1) The north face is also one of Scotland's foremost venues for winter mountaineering on snow and ice, and holds snow until quite late in the year; and in a good year routes may remain in winter condition until mid-spring.

Thanks, I hadn't spotted that. I intend to expand the climbing section soon, if I can, and I'll address grammar at the same time.

Suggestion 2) 'Miscellany' rather than 'Trivia'. If it's trivial it shouldn't be there.

I'm not sure that would be a better name; the reasoning behind WP:AVTRIV (WTF?? Sorry, I mean Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles) is not so much avoiding trivia per se as avoiding sections full of miscellaneous trivial facts. Calling it "Miscellany" still gives it the potential to attract, well, a miscellany of facts that ought to belong somewhere else.

I have not simply edited the page as this is where my question comes in. I think it is a 'good article' but I don't feel fully qualified yet to judge if it is a good article. I looked at the candidates page and was expecting to see a vote of some kind, not further bewildering jargon. Does 'Remove it from the list using the edit summary "Passed Article Name"' etc. mean something other than 'I think this is a good article?' It's already been nominated, so it can't be a nomination. I am willing to be helpful but don't want to step out of line. (Nor did I want to edit it in case that precluded being helpful). Any suggestions gratefully received. Ben MacDui (Talk) 10:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry the Good Article candidates page is a bit impenetrable. Basically there's no voting or discussion; it just takes one person to review the article according to the criteria and pass or fail it. (Obviously the system relies on trust to a fair degree, but it seems to work.) So if you "remove it from the list" etc. you're not just saying "I think this is a Good Article" but "I hereby declare that this is a Good Article" (which involves taking it off the list of candidates and putting a notice to that effect in the appropriate places). Hope that makes it a bit clearer!

Regarding whether or not to edit, "if you have not contributed significantly to this article" certainly doesn't preclude a reviewer from fixing grammar or making minor changes; it just means you shouldn't have written whole paragraphs, I assume. In any case, if you'd like to edit the article I suggest you go right ahead and let someone else do the reviewing.

Personally I think it needs a bit of work if it's to pass. It's good (though I say so myself; certainly better than it was not so long ago), but still has a few major defects, like lack of referencing. I'll be able to get my hands on the SMC Central Highlands guide next weekend, which may help. --Blisco 20:53, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. If you think I can help, just let me know. I will see if I can find anything useful in the archives. Ben MacDui (Talk) 21:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have a copy of Murray, W.H. (1977) The Companion Guide to the West Highlands of Scotland. London. Collins, which may provide some verification of a few facts and perhaps some additional evocative sentences. I don't want to start making unsolicited edits in the middle of a GA process as I have none of the history of the article. Murray makes the following statements:

From the car park in Glen Nevis "the open slope on your left runs four thousand feet to the summit of Ben Nevis at an angle of thirty-five degrees - the longest and steepest hill-slope in Britain."

"the Nevis gorge is the finest example of its kind in in Great Britain. It is only four hundred feet high, but the immense walls to its right and left are wooded in pine, oak birch and rowan. These sprout in profusion from the crags, giving the rock gorge a Himalayan character not seen elsewhere in this country."

The Steall waterfall "is 350 feet high and one of the three biggest in Scotland."

From the summit, "On exceptional days, Ireland can be dimly discerned a hundred and twenty miles away."

He insists that although it has "aroused much conjecture" the name Ben Nevis "derives from a Gaelic compound word Beinn-neamh-bhathais. 'Neamh' means the heavens or clouds; 'bathais', the top of a man's head (between crown and brow). A free translation is 'The mountain with its head in the clouds'."

"Atmospheric condensation tends to cover the summit with a cloud-cap when the rest of the sky is clear, hence it gets an average of only two hours of bright sunshine per day and an annual rainfall of 157 inches. The mean monthly temperature is half a degrees below freezing point. Snow may thus fall on the mountain at any day or month of the year."

"The summit area has an average of two hundred and sixty one gales per annum. Many of these reach hurricane force."

"The old Observatory near the cliff's edge was built in 1883 .... and closed down in 1904."

I suspect that an early un-referenced version of the article may have been based in part on this book. Ben MacDui (Talk) 22:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't worry about interfering – be bold and contribute! I've added the ref about the south face; perhaps you could add the page number and ISBN? In general the bits that need most attention are probably climbing (does Murray have anything to say about that? Though 1977 might make it a bit out of date), the race and the cairns/posts issue, though any improvements are welcome. --Blisco 23:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'll have a bash - probably at the weekend. Ben MacDui (Talk) 21:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The referencing system is not one I'm very familiar with. If each ref has a page number associated with it, this presumably means that each time I mention Murray it needs a separate ref rather than using the <ref name=/> trick. I'll proceed on this basis. Re "does Murray have anything to say about" climbing - we are talking about the author of the Scottish Himalayan Expedition although his comments are fairly brief in this case. Ben MacDui (Talk) 15:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment. Just so you know, I responded over on the Arete talk page (so future editors can see what we were chatting on.). SnowFire 00:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tha gu math Blisco? (Or something like that.) I noticed your addition to the Assynt stub and managed to find a reference which I have added. I see you have an interest in the Gaelic pronunciations of Scottish mountains. I recently created an article about Dubh Artach which includes some rambling and speculative comments about the derivation of the name which I fear skates perilously close to WP:OR. Despite my jaunty opening I am by no means a Gaelic speaker, but it seems obvious to me that Dhu Heartach is simply a sassenach's spelling of the sound Dubh Artach when spoken by a native speaker, but I lack any experience of phonetic renderings etc. If you have a moment I would be grateful if you could have a look at Dubh Artach#Celtic Name. Any edits or suggestions re phonetic spellings in particular are most welcome. The MacFie/Dubthaigh reference took considerable effort to sort out, but is probably misleading and I am considering amending it or removing it. Ben MacDui (Talk) 11:09, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good article – I'm impressed! My limited knowledge of Gaelic isn't much help here, but I've added some similarly speculative comments plus one reference (albeit not exactly a cast-iron one). I'll explain them on the article talk page.

Thanks for all this. I have had another go and (I hope) removed the need for {fact} tags. Don't know how I missed the NLB 'the black one of death' idea. No wonder they changed the name! Is there any hope you might add some phonetics - and if not can you suggest someone? Ben MacDui (Talk) 18:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just remembered this, and added a transcription in the lead section -- hope that's what you meant. I don't think it would be a good idea to go adding phonetics to the Name section, unless it was by someone who really knew what they were talking about regarding the history of Gaelic. --Blisco 18:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I love your user page by the way (so much so that I'm tempted to pinch the idea). We Lakeland fells can't quite match up to the lofty heights of our northern neighbours, but at least we have a few swashbuckling names between us. One small correction: surely you dwell in Caledonia, not Hibernia? --Blisco 23:17, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind remarks, and by all means feel free. As for the correction, it seems only just the other eon that we were in Laurentia. It's so hard to keep track. Ben MacDui (Talk) 18:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article was on the main page for most of Saturday (not nominated by me), everybody else seemed quite happy with it, did small changes and I received some plaudits, until you decided to give it a major overhaul. Thats the reason I was not happy as you had done something similar with Sgurr na Lapaich. If this is your policy for your so called "Key Mountains" than I think I'll leave them alone and concentrate on other Munros and Wainwrights. Mick Knapton 22:53, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on User talk:Mick Knapton. --Blisco 20:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you a very merry Thanksgiving! Hope you and your family have a magnificent day! So, what are you thankful for? Hooray and happy gormandiziŋ! --Randfan please talk talk to me!

Have a great day! Please respond on my talk page (the red "fan" link in my signature). Cheers! :) —Randfan!!

Thanks for sorting this out so uncontroversially. Ericoides 13:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Glad to ave elped (sic). --Blisco 17:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've made some edits to Kendal in the past and I was wondering if you would like to try and get the article to featured article status? I've set up a subpage which can be found at Kendal/featured article to create the new page in (I've done this so the Kendal entry doesn't get distrupted whilst all the alterations are made), I've also put some suggsted headers in place (I've had a look at the Weymouth page, as this is featured article status. Let me know if your interested and we'll take it from their, cheers RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 16:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have known for more than forty years that the Trig point was a few feet lower than the summit, but the fact had slipped my mind at the time of writing because of the illusion when you are up there that the Trig point is higher. It would be interesting to check OS heights, but I expect that they are correct. Is the GPS system very expensive? Dbfirs 22:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW a basic GPS can be got for around £100 I think, but they're not really accurate enough to measure heights to a 2m degree of accuracy - and in any case measuring the altitude and then putting it into a Wikipedia article would violate Wikipedia:No original research. The OS are probably right, though the 678m height is marked in orange rather than black on the map, so it may not be entirely reliable.

Nice article on Baugh Fell. I did a bit of restructuring to present the information in a more ordered way - I hope you approve. I don't know the area unfortunately, and any information I added was based entirely on a reading of the map, but I hope it's accurate! --Blisco 18:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for tidying up. As you will realise, I am just learning Wikipedia rules. I was intending to remove the subjective bits because I noticed they didn't fit in with Wikipedia style. I don't think I can afford the professional GPS systems - they are very much more expensive than the £100 "toys" so I will just accept OS heights. The difference is too small to measure on a clinometer. Yes, your map-reading matches reality. Best wishes, Dbfirs 20:51, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, see you've reverted the height. I've given them a welcome and asked for their source- wouldn't be the first time the Ordnance had changed their minds.

While I'm at it you'll see I've just done a bit on your namesake. Not my finest ever work- I hadn't realised what a complicated individual you'd named yourself after until I tied to describe it- but hopefully material for others to polish. Bobble Hat 22:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I noticed your message after I'd reverted. I'm afraid I assumed bad faith in this case - 977 and 978 are both admissible, but I've never seen 979, and it just seemed to have all the hallmarks of sneaky vandalism. Ah well, we'll see if there's any feedback.

Good work on Pike o' Blisco. I'll do a bit more on it when I have time. --Blisco 10:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gloriously unanotomical? You can can a left boot. You can have a right boot. If you've lost a leg you can have a boot. Middleboots are unusual. Terrible English now I come to look at it, but I couldn't resist. Bobble Hat 22:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, silly me. I like it, though I fear it may be unencyclopedic language... still, will let others chuckle/scratch their heads over it for the time being at least.

On further consideration: I have a pair of heavy mountaineering boots, and a pair of light climbing boots, but for a summer ascent of Scafell Pike I'd use... guess what? :-) --Blisco 23:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know anybody who would put themselves on either of these pages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:User_en-gb-mcr http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:User_en-gb-tyn or use either of these user boxes

• {{user en-gb-tyn}}
• {{user en-gb-mcr}}

Roligpolig 06:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um, no. --Blisco 11:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have written to some of the other editors regarding this article, could you take a look at the latest deletions by ras52, I put in other citations and references yesterday and they have been unilaterally deleted by the above user, I have not reverted the deletions as its probably best to get some idea if there is any support for citing the RGS and other such bodies, and other books, i.e. "Gerald of Wales" in 1198. It took quite a while trawling through the libraries to locate them, but they got deleted in justa few minutes. Admitedly they are not perfect, but I didn't deserve that treatment. Diolch yn fawr. (Gowron 08:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC))

Blisco, I'd like your opinion as someone who seems relatively unbiased to this article — am I being unreasonable over on Carnedd Llewelyn? To be honest, I'm not all that bothered by which spelling is used; what I am concerned about is the process of deciding upon a spelling, and the who-can-shout-loudest process that appears to be happening seems absolutely the wrong one. So if you wouldn't mind, I'd really like a second opinion even if that opinion is "do sit down and shut up". — ras52 09:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That talk page does seem like a dialogue of the deaf at times, doesn't it? I think you're quite right to insist on determining current usage rather than getting bogged down with history; however, it seems that the jury will remain out on that issue, so in the end we'll have to go with the consensus, whatever the reasoning behind it might be. I'd hoped my "final" summary might put an end to the arguments, but unfortunately it's only made them flare up again.

On the references issue, I agree with your point, but please remember WP:AGF and WP:NPA and avoid comments like "sheer bloody stupidity", which really don't help matters (and certainly aren't necessary in edit summaries). I think the current version of that paragraph is about right, though as Stemonitis points out on his talk page, it's still drifting into the realms of original research (my fault, I'm afraid). I'll try and find time to improve it, and indeed wrap up the whole sorry business, in the next couple of days. --Blisco 13:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blisco,

You made some comments a while back on geography picture licences and the Wikipedia for schools. At last I can answer: we are about 72 hours from officially launching the 2007 selection but you can browse it at http://schools-wikipedia.org/ . We have done what you asked (I hope; unlike the 0.7 Release CD which didn't master the technology) i.e. included the image pages and attributions for all 13000 pictures on the disk, click on the photos to see. Perhaps you could check a few and let me know if it is a problem. The subject index >>> Geography >>> Great Britain should get you most of the articles with the pictures in. Incidentally this is now set up on a fully automated database so we can add articles or change subject classification at a click of a button: therefore suggestions are still ok even now especially if when proposing articles you give me a link to a historical version which you are sure is vandalism free. The todo list left is rather short now.

Thanks --BozMo talk 18:51, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having wasted far too much time on Wikipedia in the past, and having rather less wastable time now than I used to (and being somewhat exasperated by the amount of drivel that pervades this encyclopedia), my presence here is now generally limited to occasional correction of errors and sporadic contributions to selected articles.

I know how you feel, and I'm getting increasingly tempted to do the same myself. Still, it'll be a shame if you leave as you've made lots of useful contributions to WP:BIHILLS and elsewhere. Best wishes, ras52 00:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear you are a bit browned off. Perhaps Wikipedia:WikiProject Scottish Islands can help? Pay a visit to a Scottish island sometime soon. Plenty of opportunity for creativity, great images, lots of hills and refreshingly free of vandals. Ben MacDui (Talk) 18:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a time issue really - I just don't have the time these days to spend hours in front of the computer researching and editing, I do enough of that at work anyway. If I get involved with anything beyond occasional minor contributions it'll be on a few select articles that particularly interest me. Thanks for the kind words though. --Blisco 21:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - Please feel free to delete the plooks entry, it wasn't that serious! Excalibur 21:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Javitomad, a Spanish user of English wikipedia.

I've seen you've improved some articles about Spain.

Because of that, I want to give you a Barnstar, the Spanish Barnstar.

• 
  I, Javitomad, give you this Barnstar for contributing for a better Spanish-English Wikipedia.
  August 16^th, 2007.

(copy and paste this in your user page.)

Javitomad (...tell me...) 20:16, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for choosing my picture of Snowdon for Template:BIhills! Every time I see it, I'm reminded of a beautiful day in the Welsh hills. Gdr 00:31, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A photo you uploaded under the title Image:Picture 008 has been reuploaded under the less-generic title Image:Borrowdale at dusk.jpg. This was because your original upload was overwritten by another editor uploading an identically titled photo (since deleted). The old title is now protected so this sort of thing won't happen again.

Lovely photograph, by the way. --Calton | Talk 11:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a nice photo, but it's not mine, and I didn't upload it! Looking at my contributions and log I see I did do some edits to Borrowdale-related articles on 7 Jan 07, but I didn't touch that one. --Blisco (talk) 12:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. The edit history says "Originally uploaded by User:Blisco as Image:Picture 008 on 14:20, 7 January 2007", so that's what I went by. I'd best drop a note to the admin who did the reuploading. --Calton | Talk 15:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aaah, I've just remembered what happened. It was originally uploaded by someone else, and was subsequently replaced by another unrelated Picture 008 (as happened again recently). I merely reverted to the earlier version. Don't know why my revert doesn't show up in my edit history or log though. --Blisco (talk) 22:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blisco, following on from our discussion about the infobox and Ben Nevis I wanted to float something past you. IMO it would declutter pages quite a lot if the infoboxes for British towns, lochs/lakes and mountains were all adjusted slightly to display the indigenous name & pronunciation. Something along the lines of what settlements now have (eg Neilston) but - to stave off howls of protest, with equal prominence and with pronunciation behing for both English and Gaelic/Irish/Welsh etc. So it's look a bit like:

Neilston (IPA: [niːlstən])

Gaelic: Baile Nèill (IPA: [paləˈnɛːʎ])

That way the pronunciation boxes could be moved out of the headline which I think would make sense. What do you think? I just want to get a few opinions before I suggest it - well, and find out how you locate the ppl who made an infobox in the first place ;) Akerbeltz (talk) 17:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since you expressed an opinion in the last AfD regarding UK service areas at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donington Park services, I'd like to inform you of a new AfD discussion which has recently been started by another user at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norton Canes services (2nd nomination). In the interests of keeping this within the rules regarding canvassing, I am sending this to everyone involved with that original debate, regardless of if they voted keep or delete, or if they appear to be active or inactive. Jeni ^(talk) 14:32, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Tiptoety ^talk 15:06, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man. U're obviously right about Ireland, also it looks like I made a mistake about Luxembourg. Well, you may change it if u're able to because I'm not that good at the Paint stuff. ;) --Jaro7788 (talk) 15:51, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since this bridge does not actually turn could you rename the image, say to change bridge as it was the place where the tow horses were changed from one side of the canal to the other? Peter Horn User talk 23:39, 7 March 2011 (UTC) Peter Horn User talk 23:48, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is an open WP:SPI case looking at sockpuppet editing primarily on the Johann Hari/ Talk page. As you edited the Johann Hari/Talk page between 2004 and 2011, your input is welcomed.

Hi Blisco, I came across the picture mentioned in the subject and would very much like to use it on a book cover that will be commercially distributed. I'd love to know if that would be acceptable to you and would love to secure a higher resolution file from you if you have one. Please let me know if you would be interested in that, and what compensation you might think is reasonable for this use. I created a wikipedia account specifically to talk to you. If there is a more private way to communicate I would certainly prefer that. Thank you, TheSoulDoc (talk) 15:32, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:AWainwright.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —innotata 17:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]