Misplaced Pages

Templates for deletion

Please see Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion#Universities in the United Kingdom navigational templates. Thanks, mattbr 00:50, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Please improve

Anthony John Bailey - Kittybrewster 02:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• I don't really know anything about this person I am afraid. Is it not up for deletion anyway? Astrotrain 15:07, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Request for comment

Since your name has been dragged into this (not by me), it seems only fair to ask if you would like to comment on this; and you have a pretty good idea of the background. As you and I are not exactly bosum buddies, you may be able to apply a more objective perspective to this ugly situation:

• Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:81.155.34.127_reported_by_User:Mais_oui.21_.28Result:.29

--Mais oui! 17:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• I am not keen on being quoted there, as I have never called for you to be banned or blocked. The quote is taken out of context. It also seems that the topic has diverted off the 3RR breach that was reported. It is unfortuante that some users are hijacking the 3RR process to attack you though- and the other users who have responded to this trolling should really know better. I am also experiencing problems with an abusive editor (also with his own proven sockpuppet)- and have a false 3RR report against me just below your one. I would advise to not respond to the baiting on that page and hope that admin action is taken the Orcadian IPs- such an IP posted on here a while ago to rant- but he/she/they did not seem to take my advice. Although we have had editing differences in the past (and probably will do again no doubt!), I am not willing to be part of any vendetta. Astrotrain 18:12, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I have noticed that our encounters have been more constructive of late.

It is all pretty academic now, as that IP address has been blocked anyway; although it is typical of the pattern that within an hour he just switches to a new IP address, to comment at the 3RR!?! Ah, the rich irony...

I'll eat my hat if we see any timely, constructive Admin action out of this frankly surreal farce. I am not aware of any similar tolerance of rampant IP abuse anywhere else on Misplaced Pages. Why? --Mais oui! 18:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Warning

This is a warning about certain behaviour which is uncivil. You were asked a question by Vintagekits and instead of answering it, you archived the talk. When it was reposted with a correct request not to archive open discussions, you archived it again, and again. You were asked a legitimate question, namely why you had labelled an edit (for which a rationale was given in the edit summary) as "rv POV vandal". This edit summary in itself is a breach of etiquette and should not be used against good faith edits, even if they are ones you disagree with. Continuation of this attitude will result in being blocked. Tyrenius 03:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I've blocked Astrotrain 48 hours for this. Astrotrain, if you wish to continue editing here, you're going to have to start following Misplaced Pages's policies a lot more closely than you have been. Incidentally, this is your fourth block, which is why I went for 48h instead of 24h. I'm hoping that you take this time to cool down, and that when you return, you mind WP:CIVIL as well as WP:POV. | Mr. Darcy talk 05:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

It was a toss up for me between another warning and a block, so I endorse your action. Tyrenius 05:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I think Astrotrain will be surprised by this block which was IMHO an excessive unexpected response without warning. The warning WAS appropriate. The way I read it, Astrotrain was trying to reduce the temperature which was being raise by the persistent boring relentlessness of another editor. I think the block should be revoked. - Kittybrewster 10:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Havent you been warned about your breaches on WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. Please refrain from this in future.--Vintagekits 11:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I was not following this at the time, but after reviewing the records, it seems pretty clear to me that a block is excessive. I too support its removal. --Mais oui! 10:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Blocks are preventative, not punative. The purpose of a block is not to punish you for using an inappropriate edit summary or engaging in incivil behavior, but to correct the issue. If you are asking that a preventative block be removed, then I would think there would at least need to be some recognition that your edit summary was wrong and a willingness to discuss the issue rather than to declare that those with whom you disagree are vandals. --BigDT 14:11, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Removal of referenced material to suit an agenda is vandalism in my opinion. If trolling and harrassment are to be tolerated in this case then I am not going to bother. It is a shame that good editors are being hounded off Misplaced Pages by POV vandals and their admin allies. Astrotrain 14:23, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

User:MrDarcy and User:Vintagekits apear to see blocks as punitive. Quote by the latter - I want Kitty punished for stirring up this trouble. - Kittybrewster 14:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Its pathetic the way Darcy and Tyrenius are behaving. They should really be stripped of their admin status for the mess they are creating. Harrassment of other editors is not the way an admin should be behaving. They are only encouraging the trolls who have been stalking us. Astrotrain 19:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

here here Jonto 19:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I came here because I was going through Category:Requests for unblock. I have no interest in the matter and, that I can recall, have never edited any article on this subject, nor interacted with any of those involved in this issue. I took a look at the diffs provided and upheld the block. Regardless of motivation, calling someone a vandal who is editing in good faith - even if you believe them to be in error - is not being civil. It is important to discuss contentious issues on the talk page, rather than reverting and holding the discussion in edit summaries. If there is an issue that is not going to be resolved, you can make a request on WP:RFP for the page to be protected in order that discussion may be facilitated. --BigDT 19:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I very much doubt that you can describe an undoubted POV vandal such as User:Vintagekits as 'editing in good faith'. Just ignore these stupid Admins Jonto 20:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I have blocked Jonto 24 hours for that completely unprovoked personal attack. Any other user who drops in here to make personal attacks against anyone involved in this debate (regardless of their "side") will be blocked as well. The sniping must stop immediately. | Mr. Darcy talk 21:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

lol!! Jonto 19:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Good action. Editors are entitled to participate in creating an encyclopedia without this kind of harassment. Tyrenius 01:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

There has been no reason given for the block- archiving talk pages is within my discretion and I am not obliged to respond to trolling and harrasment by a user with a history of vandalism and sockpuppet actions. Darcy only blocked me because he has been harrassing me for weeks, supported by Tyrenius, and couldn't wait for the chance. Blocking me for 48 hours is a complete disgrace. There is nothing in the blocking policy to support this action. Astrotrain 20:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

• This is yet more harrassment. I am not going to respond to this matter further- I have better things to do that argue with these people. Astrotrain 09:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Flag_of_the_Governor_General_of_Australia.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Flag_of_the_Governor_General_of_Australia.gif, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Iamunknown 20:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of films banned in Iran

While browsing AfD today, I noticed that the vast majority of your AfD arguments have nothing to do with Misplaced Pages policy or guidelines. Please remember that AfD is not a vote, and have a look at Misplaced Pages:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Furthermore, your comment that it is "important to know what the barbaric regime in Iran is banning", in addition to not being a valid AfD argument, doesn't reflect the kind of NPOV professionalism that is expected of Misplaced Pages editors. If everyone used AfD (to say nothing of Misplaced Pages in general) as their personal viewpoint soapbox, nothing would get done here. A Train 16:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

response below copied from my talk page A Train 16:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I am well aware of how to vote in an AFD- and my comments are perfectly valid in that context. Astrotrain 16:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Forgive me for disagreeing, but I don't think that Keep- midly interesting is a valid rationale. I would absolutely discount it were I to close out that AfD. I have no bone to pick with you, I'm only advising your to hew closer to WP policy citations and further from personal opinion when joining the discussion at AfD, lest you end up wasting your time and energy on votes that will be ultimately discounted. A Train 16:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Incivility block

You are blocked from Misplaced Pages for a period of one week due to repeated incivility. Please see WP:CIVIL and this ANI thread. You may contest this block with {{unblock|your reason here}}. Sandstein 21:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Consensus at WP:ANI has determined that the above block was inappropriate, so I'm unblocking you. However, please do remember to remain civil at all times. This also includes keeping our editing environment free of offtopic and inflammatory comments. Consider that, as we are working on a global project that unites people of all faiths and ideologies, we must not have such things distract us unnecessarily from our job to build an encyclopedia. Sandstein 22:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. This is also true on Islam-related articles, where a general crackdown on trollish and inflammatory comments may be in the works. Obviously you meant no harm with your remarks about Christianity, but we saw how they were taken.

Per your comments on Talk:Muhammad, I thought I'd inform you that mediation on this very issue is underway..Proabivouac 06:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Balcombe Street Siege

You just reverted my edit, can you please explain why.

1. You changed killing to assassination when assassination is cleared stated as a term that should be avoided.

2. As per the mediation cabal the agreement was to use the term Volunteer after member in this fashion - members (volunteers) - why did you change that?

3. You removed "agreed to end the siege" and replaced it with "surrendered" when in fact they agreed mutually to end the siege and no surrender was forced.

4. You removed "a number of attacks including the killing of" and replaced it with "various terrorist crimes, including" when terrorist is again a loaded them and set out as a term to be avoided.--Vintagekits 20:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

1996 South Quay bombing

On what basis are you stating that this is a terrorist attack?--Vintagekits 22:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Federal Commonwealth Society

Could you help reference and add information on the Federal Commonwealth Society? --Couter-revolutionary 22:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Images

Agree, images are necessary- it is not as if the image depicts him in an offensive way or anything

Disagree, the images dont do anything to the page or the info. It is just an image and Im just making a simple request for a warning for people at the top of the page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ssd175 (talk • contribs) 22:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

Ivor Bell

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. One Night In Hackney 23:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

That edit may have been problematic but it was NOT vandalism. | Mr. Darcy talk 02:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Northern Ireland debate

You have been involved in the flag debate on the Northern Ireland talk page. If you remember there were four option listed about the way forward. If you wish you can go here and make your position clear. regards--Vintagekits 21:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Astrotrain, why can't you leave the article as it is until concencus is arrived at. It you persist I will report you for vandalism.--padraig3uk 20:54, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The flags were removed since they are already in the infobox. You put them there in the middle of the debate if I remember right. Astrotrain 20:57, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:BLP

You seem to be having some trouble with our policy on bios of living people. The policy states that all claims regarding living people (with particular attention to contentious or controversial claims) must be properly sourced. It does not require that those sources be available online, although I think given the choice of two sources we'd take the online one over the other, all else being equal. If you encounter a dead link that has other relevant information on the source as it appeared in print, the best course of action is to de-link the text and add a note on the talk page that the link was dead on such-and-such date. Let me know if you have any questions. | Mr. Darcy talk 23:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

One night in hackney

If you readd the comments to User:One Night In Hackney/Problems2's page again, you will be in violation of the WP:3RR. Furthermore, this behavior is fairly uncivil as the page is in hackneys userspace where he is using it to forge a complaint. Please wait to address the issues until the complaint has been brought before the community. Thanks. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 15:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

• I havn't reverted the page- so I can't see what you are referring to. Per the userpage policy "Other users may edit pages in your user space". It's a shame that ONH is being allowed to openly harrass another user. He shouldn't be allowed to attack contributions on his userpage and not expect a reply. Astrotrain 15:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Further on in that userpage policy: "Other users may edit pages in your user space, although by convention your user page will usually not be edited by others. ... In general it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing another's user page without their permission." ONiH has made it clear that he does not wish for you to edit that page, and multiple admins have told you that the page is not in violation of any policy or guideline. Let it go. | Mr. Darcy talk 15:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

If users create pages like this- they are clearly troublemaking. Even if he is going to file an RFC- he is not allowed to make these comments in his userspace. It is against the policy- black and white and I am perfectly entitled to edit that page. I will be tagging it for deletion if no one is prepared to censure him. Astrotrain 17:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

You are wrong on all counts. It is not against the policy. You should not edit that page. You've been advised by multiple admins on the best course of action; I suggest that you take it. | Mr. Darcy talk 17:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

RFC/USER discussion concerning you (Astrotrain)

RfC

Now the RfC is up, do you have any objection to deleting the user subpage? It seems redundant now. Guy (Help!) 22:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

• Never mind, your comments on the noticeboard have been taken as consent. Guy (Help!) 09:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Gibraltar

Could you possibly what you meant by "resign from project - doesn't appear to be happening"? I've been working on the setup of the project over the last few days, so it definitely is happening - see my post at for a summary of developments. -- ChrisO 17:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to be going anywhere- and appears to be causing arguments. Astrotrain 17:52, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

If you mean Gibnews' objections, frankly I don't know what his problem is. He's the only person to have objected to it. I'm guessing it's a "ownership" issue, as he appears to have a problem with collaborating on article development and the concept of WikiProjects in general. You're welcome to rejoin at any time if you wish. In the meantime, you may find this new public watchlist to be of use in monitoring changes to the Gibraltar-related articles (see to view it in action). -- ChrisO 00:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Vintagekits

I've blocked him for a personal attack. Re. Flag of the United Kingdom, I suggest you first lay out your case with refs etc very clearly on the article talk page, as I have done on Talk:Sir_Norman_Stronge,_8th_Baronet. Don't get into an edit war on the article. Good points need to be answered. If not, then you have a clear case. If there is still a dispute, see WP:DR and how to involve 3rd parties. Tyrenius 01:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Rant

You beat me by seconds at the Falklands war talk page! SqueakBox 16:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

G8

Before you go challening the recent changes to the G8 please read , a massive week long discussion regarding this change. I dont want to hear this hasent been discussed or consensus has not been forged. Several very involved editors spent hours finding sources with arguments and counter-arguments. ALl parties remained calm (partially because the article was protected). I just un-protected the article to allow the inclusion of the Eu in the manner specified as discussed on the talk page. Please do not edit war over this. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 01:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

What I am telling you is we already had this discussion! Please read the entire thing before complaing about it. We have had already had a loooooong discussion regarding this. All the g8 sources show that the Eu should be included but listed spereratly. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 01:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Template:British dependencies

Hi Astrotrain,

(rv back to more tidy version)

Please let me know what you found untidy about the previous version, so in future I may bear it in mind. Regards, David Kernow (talk) 20:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

• It looked untidy in the layout. I think centre alignment works best for these types of template. Astrotrain 10:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

  Understood; thanks for the feedback. Have tried to enhance center-alignment as described in recent edit summary (and move template's apparent center-of-gravity nearer to its vertical center). I've left the flag, but wonder if the template might look more balanced without it – perhaps make it an icon preceding the title...?  Yours, David (talk) 03:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Hey that looks much better- I think a flag would be appropiate given the subject matter. Thanks Astrotrain 09:43, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Vintagekits

I have seen your citation of Vintagekits about British people making his skin crawl, and Scottish monarchists, which must breach just about every Misplaced Pages convention. My suggestion is that you lift that paragraph and place it on the Administrator's Noticeboard. It is clear from other things he so often says that these comments are sincerely held by him. How are we supposed to do academic and intelligent work when people who are so biased are in the wings waiting to attack it? David Lauder 22:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

It is a very unfortunate remark to make- it is clearly offensive to all British editors on Misplaced Pages. I placed it on Tyrenius' talk page for him to review first- he has warned him in the past for offensive remarks and NPA violations and I thought it more appropiate to raise here. I was hoping he would retract the remark but he hasn't yet. Astrotrain 22:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Where did he say that? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 22:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Here on Talk:Celtic F.C. - did you miss it? Astrotrain 22:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

OK. That's just saying he doesn't like the term in relation to Celtic. It may or may not relate to his feelings about British people, but you can't get that information from that sentence. He says nothing about "British people making his skin crawl". Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 22:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

You may not be insulted by this business, and poo poo it, but I am prepared to take it much further if necessary. What he said, exactly, is this: "Aside from the fact that term British actually makes my skin crawl". Whateve context you may think he was using such a statement does not excuse the severity of it. The man clearly has a serious chip on his shoulder against the British. It and other remarks he has made about monarchists and the aristocracy questions his ability to be a constructive and unbiased editor who others feel they can work with. David Lauder 23:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, he's from either northern Ireland or Rep. Ireland; the relationship with "British" is not one of one people versus another, but of a person rejecting a term of identity. He's perfectly entitled to do that without being labled "racist"; I've heard, for instance, lots of Scots express revulsion at the concept of "Britishness", and it's never occurred to me that this might be racism. Identities are sensitive matters, and people will react if you try to impose one on them they don't want. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 00:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

List of British flags

Why are you trying to call the Ulster Banner when you KNOW plainly that it is not the Flag of Northern Ireland.--Vintagekits 09:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you please answer this instead of continuing to edit other pages or else I am just going to revert it to the correct version. regards --Vintagekits 09:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Astotrain, your are vandalising this article, by ignoring the discussion of the talk page, and the facts of the issue. I will now ask you to restore the last edit you reverted, or I will consider reporting you for vandalising articles.--padraig3uk 17:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

You are the one trying to remove referenced material without any explanation. Flags.net is a reputable source, as are FIFA, UEFA and the Commonwealth Games Federation. Graham Bartram runs the World Flag Database. He is a highly respected vexillologist and is currently Secretary-General for Congresses of FIAV (Fédération internationale des associations vexillologiques). He is also the Chief Vexillologist of the Flag Institute. The Database lists the UB as the unoffical flag of Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom sub-national flags page. This is what is replicated here and well referenced. Please read WP:V and WP:OR before you label good faith edits as vandalism. Astrotrain 17:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

It is very hard to assume good faith, when it has been repeatly pointed out to you that the Ulster Banner is not an Official National Flag, and your source Flags.net makes this very clear.

This flag is a banner of the arms of the old Government of Northern Ireland. The flag ceased to be official in 1973, but continues to be used by Unionists. On no account should it be used for official purposes.

It has also been pointed out to you that the use of flags by sporting bodies dosent confer any legal status on that flag, under British Law the Ulster Banner is not recognised in any legal manner. I don't understand why you keep refering to WP:V and WP:OR their is nobody using OR in this article. --padraig3uk 18:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

We are not saying anything about it being offical or legal. Astrotrain 19:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I see you are now canvassing other editors, to get them to revert the edits, is that the we your refering to. ?. --padraig3uk 20:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Astrotrain - stop "feeding the trolls" - it has been going on for long enough to see that neither 'padraig3uk' nor 'vintagekits' are acting in good faith with many of their pro-Irish republican edits to articles Jonto 00:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:US_Embassy_Iran.gif

Hi. the image Image:US_Embassy_Iran.gif is up for deletion. Can you please provide the source where you found the image on the image page so it won't get deleted? Thank you. --Arad 16:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Duchess of Windsor

I do not think that was right. She was explicitly denied an HRH. I don't know that she was explicitly denied a princess-ship, but that was surely the implication. She should at least be asterixed, but probably removed and only discussed in a footnote. john k 01:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:RNZAF Orion.jpg

I just deleted this image as a copyvio from here. If you have uploaded other images from private collections, please tag them for deletion. Jkelly 05:36, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:QM standard.gif

Thank you for uploading Image:QM standard.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. DrKiernan 09:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Transformers

Hey there. Im sorry about the delay, but I only just noticed how much the project participants section has grown since I last checked. Anyway I just wanted to say welcome to the project on behalf of everyone at wikiproject Transformers. Its always cool to meet a fellow TF fan (and a fellow Scot into the bargain). Best Regards. SMegatron 20:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Lady Mabel Fitzwilliam

you removed the fact tag I inserted on the above page without inputing a reference. Can you please explain this edit.

regards--Vintagekits 09:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Fire of London Monument

Astrotrain, please leave the images alone, I am starting to think you are following me around the wiki.--padraig3uk 19:00, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

• Well its nice of you to take some pictures, please don't put poor quality pictures at the top of the article. Do you really think that is a good picture? Astrotrain 19:03, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Astrotrain, the Monument is surrounded on all sides by very narrow single lane streets and high buildings, it is impossible to get a brighter picture of the entire monument, as the street is in shadow all the time.--padraig3uk 19:06, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

That is why the current pictures should be in the main article space. Given the small size of the article, placing large poor quality images gives a bad impression. Astrotrain 19:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

What street did you take it from (for the caption)?

Thomas Begley‎

Please explain exactly why you have removed referenced material from the above article without any discussion.--Vintagekits 10:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

"Do not remove referenced material just because you do not like its content"- what like this for example ? Astrotrain 11:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

There is a big difference from removing material is 1. contrary to what is stated under British Law, 2. which is referenced from a commercial shop and 3. actioning it after a long discussion has taken place about the topic then what you have done. Now can you explain your edit?--Vintagekits 11:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you explain this edit?--Vintagekits 12:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

An edit summary is visible Astrotrain 12:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Are you seriously stating that the IRA wrote Tirghra?--Vintagekits 12:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

3RR warning

You are about to violate the WP:3RR rule on the article Northern Ireland. Please take it to a talk page before you get temporarily blocked. Ben W Bell talk 12:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• I am not about to violate it. Padraig refuses to discuss on the talk page. He inserted the images in question in the middle of a debate on the flags in an attempt to delete them from the infobox without consensus. As there is no consensus to remove the flags from the infobox, they should not be in the history section. Padraig should read WP:OWN.
  • Technically, you are. Last I checked, there were not exceptions in WP:3RR for cases stated above. If there are, please feel free to point them out to me. Thanks. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 12:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I am not about to violate it- I would only violate it if I posted 4 reverts, which I havn't and am not going to. Saying "you are about to" makes a presumption that I was going to keep reverting. Astrotrain 13:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
      • No, it is meant as a friendly warning. Perhaps, edits were in good faith and a user is unaware of the WP:3RR. Should the WP:3RR be violated, if the user has not been warned, many admin may not block said users. It is the proper procedure, when in a possible edit war and the third reversion has been reached. It is nothing personal, I am sure. There is actually a template for said warning (although I dont know its name of the top of my head). -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Block

User:81.132.173.25

You may wish to know that anonymous IP81.132.173.25 replaced your page with:

'This user has died- he killed himself. Parties will be taking place throughout the land to celebrate this wonderful news. Burn in hell!'

I will allow you to decide what action, if any, is taken, but he seems to have done things like this a lot. SplingyRanger 14:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Not dead yet- the champagne will have to stay on ice. Astrotrain 11:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Bank of St. Helena

My normal Misplaced Pages sign-on is Burgh House but I am, for my day-job, managing director of the Bank of St. Helena.

I am grateful for the creation of the bank's page, but am now happy to take over the load of maintaining the page.

Regards, John Turner Managing Director Bank of St. Helena Jamestown Island of St. Helena www.sainthelenabank.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Burgh House (talk • contribs) 11:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC).