User talk:JRPG

Welcome!

Hello, JRPG, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• 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! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  __meco 13:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}}

A minor collision seems to have occurred in the English Channel!! A photo from the History section has run into the next section and I'm not yet fully up top speed with how to sort it.

It's not perfect, but I've applied two quick fixes. First, the {{-}} template will keep text or images in one section from overflowing into another section (it sort of "pushes down" the other section until). Second, having two images very close together on the left margin, with differing sizes, appears to have had some confusing results. Hope that resolves things well enough, for now. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:04, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} Structural problems in Groby Old Hall I don't know what is wrong but I suspect there is a fault in the Leicestershire stub template. The orphaned image doesn't appear anywhere in the text and is nothing whatever to do with me!! Thanks in advance JRPG 23:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed it. The image here on English Wikipedia was deleted as the same image appeared on Wikipedia Commons. However, that image was deleted on Commons itself as duplicate as another image on Commons. I've fixed the template to use the image at this "new" location. KTC 23:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commented on the talk page of the article. Ingolfson 09:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After a merge, the remaining redirect and its edit history have to be kept for GFDL reasons. Besides, they are often useful. Happy editing! --Tikiwont 12:52, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. It's been a while but I finally went back over the North Sea article and am hoping to renominate it for GA shortly. As an active contributor to the serious improvements made a year or so ago, I'd like to invite you to take a fresh look at it, do any clean up or copy editing I've missed and generally think about how to make it better. Thanks -- Jieagles (talk) 08:36, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to the North Sea article. I have re-written some sections so that they can have sources, references and citations for every fact. Can you be a second set of eyes, and see if every number, year, new piece of info has a citation please. If you see a copy edit that needs being done, could you also help the article in the midst of the GA review. The GA review is currently studying the verifiablity of the article and if it is properly referenced with verifiable sources for facts. Kind Regards and thank you.SriMesh | talk 00:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Special Barnstar
		In appreciation of the hard work you have put into improving The Equitable Life Assurance Society --NSH001 (talk) 20:25, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I read the Talk page and see that you have placed article text there as a reference- I understand that you think it may go away from access on the internet, but leaving it on Talk is not a good idea. Maybe you could find it on the Way back machine? If you have the old link to it, you should be able to find it, and it would be better to link to it there. Good Luck Riverpa (talk) 18:23, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your effort on this. Jack Straw's Ministry of Justice took over the Department of Constitutional affairs -and ..surprise, surprise they seemed not to think the document worth keeping. Unfortunately its too late for "Way Back" though it is available on subscription websites for anyone looking for the title. Would you suggest I removed it from the Talk page as it's probably served its purpose? JRPG (talk) 16:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments, glad not to have started an argument. The dog bowl seems petty, I know, but I think it reflects well on Penning (and I'm no Tory). It's also an illustration of how otherwise decent MPs may have been dragged into the "expenses scandal" net. Yeah, we should keep an eye on political bios for improper amends - for or against. Penning's bio seems rather thin, omitting references to the local hospital, to his opposition to the re-opening of Buncefield and also his political location within the Conservative Party, for example. Ayfer Orhan's is even thinner. I added him and other, former, MPs to the "Politics in Dacorum" category. Folks at 137 (talk) 07:53, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Given your interests are rather similar to mine, shipwrecks and politicians (no connection implied), you might want to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Politics_of_the_United_Kingdom and Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships. Re Ayfer Orhan, there is consideration on the forum to deleting entries for people who have no notability other than being candidates. For the record, I am expanding the profile of capable MPs I've met irrespective of party, the country needs them.
  Regards JRPG (talk) 13:22, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've started Parliamentary candidates in Hertfordshire and I'd appreciate your comments on whether it's a worthwhile task, bearing in mind the "notability" issue. An alternative would be to alter the page to provide thumbnails of candidates (or have both formats), similar to Primary schools in Dacorum, which might address the notability issue of each candidate. Folks at 137 (talk) 07:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Based on my own experience- and other comments I really would hesitate to do this and I've already refused a request from a candidate in my own constituency. In the absence of decent sources people use their own blogs or other dubious/libellous material and it degenerates, ruining the article's educational value. I had to remove an external link to the Guardian, Rate your MP as a single individual had filled pages of it.
See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom#Articles on Prospective Parliamentary Candidates for Election 2010
According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom/Constituencies individual constituencies are low importance. To me this is incomprehensible as 60 marginals decide the election.

Regards JRPG (talk) 14:24, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Footnote:Theres a fascinating gadget at http://stats.grok.se/en/201004/mike%20penning JRPG (talk) 21:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JRPG, I would like to expand it, especially if it'd help you, but I might not do it straight away; just lots of stuff on. But if you want to ask specific questions I'm more than happy to look things up and help like that. It's an important case for contract law too. I think it wasn't unexpected - I would have blamed the directors in charge immediately before the collapse - who thought they could fist the GAR policy holders - they were a group of men whose integrity was a far cry from the people in charge since 18th century, who had had discretion, but never used it irrationally or to defeat people's legitimate expectations. It was such a shame to see the society brought to its knees as well - they could have done so much differently even after the judgment, but chose to let it go down. It was the height of hypocrisy when the former CEOs and Chairmen joined in blaming the government for failure to regulate its callousness! It'd be like watching the City blaming the government for the current financial crisis (well some probably are)? Well, that's just my impression, and I actually know very little but the bits I've seen in case law - do you think that's the wrong idea? Did you have personal experience with it? Best, Wikidea 12:02, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a small policy -but one taken out when the GAR case was imminent. I campaigned on company pensions at the same time as people were campaigning on Equitable. I know some of the people who wrote the original article, they were called as witnesses by the European Parliament and make regular tv appearances. They were experts ..but the article was a personal saga and therefore a disaster. I rewrote it as a favour ..and it took forever. The actuarian contributor NSH001 was interesting but blamed the HOL. I share your view that the GAR people had a point ..but were greedy. The European Parliament information was stunning. EU countries gave up local regulation to the UK which held the head office but -just didn't bother. Their report unfortunately had to be without prejudice. I hadn't dared remove the expert tags but the original writers all had professional financial qualifications and it was also checked by a leading Independent Trustee. The company is of real interest as a historic use of a maths/stats financial model as well as its modern legal and political importance, hence this article could go somewhere.

On another note, my degree is physics, interest is history and law and politics ..and I cribbed your radio4 box!
Regards JRPG (talk) 21:51, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw your comment about a police visit regarding content in the article and libel, have you got a link to a discussion or report about that, I would like to read about that. Off2riorob (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fourth paragraph, response by Alison W

I have to say the whole thing proved nonsense in that Similar fact evidence was given i.e. the prosecution brought up the previous cases themselves. Being right however is of little consolation if facing a punishment for contempt of court and I wouldn't have touched it with a bargepole at that point. Re libel, Barry George has successfully sued but this was for allegations made after his conviction was overturned. They could have said what they liked had he remained convicted as his reputation was worthless.
Regards JRPG (talk) 21:28, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting, there is an issue with untrained writers and misrepresentation, I wonder how wikipedia is not sued more. Many thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 22:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cyclopia. Your "impossibly long achived discussion .." included Wikipedia referenced in Tobin case. Have you noticed several IPs are single issue contributions i.e. this vote. I strongly hope they have nothing to do with the case. There's another dubious edit referring to John Haig which shows how easy it is to make mistakes. BTW I'm not sure whether breeching UK law is punishable, on conviction, elsewhere in the EU. JRPG (talk) 19:50, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I've seen several articles talking about WP involvement but none talking about lawsuits or warnings against UK editors. The comment by AlisonW was quite enough however. The still unresolved point is, however: does an UK (or EU) editor face a reasonable risk of being sued? And in any case, what to do? Looks like something Mike Godwin should answer on behalf of the Foundation -and in fact he did on a very related case (also from [1]) : "Update: Mike Godwin replied to my email. His response is below. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 17:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC) "The Foundation's official position is that we are subject to American law, including the state and Constitutional law doctrines governing defamation in the United States. The Foundation would oppose any BLP policy that recognized and attempted to adapt to the defamation laws of any other jurisdiction. We are of course aware that some individuals may attempt to sue is in a foreign jurisdiction and attempt to enforce such a judgment in the United States. We have prepared for that possibility.

"Under no circumstances should the BLP policy be altered as a reaction to perceptions of the risk of defamation liability in non-U.S. jurisdictions."

Here it is not defamation, but the clear concept seems that WP answers only USA/Florida law, not else.

Also: BBC seems to happily publish and keep on line information about the case, see here, and I am sure they're much more aware than us of this kind of problems. If they do that, I can't see why we couldn't. --Cyclopia^talk 20:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly I was on the receiving end in 2000, of what I believe was fraud involving a multi millionaire venture capitalist, a major donor to the Labour party with a lot of political influence. When I pursued the issue, I got a warning from their lawyers -which I knew I could safely ignore. The story was printed in 2 major UK sunday newspapers and the lawyers checked every line and allowed the guy a right of reply. A third newspaper scrapped an article after the threat of an injunction. Note the comparison with Wikipedia. A balanced article from a decent source, properly cited, will already have been checked by the source and is not a WP:BLP issue. We however are getting uncited assumption of guilt comments such as someone saying he's not the first mass murderer from his school.

Its only on a talk page but its both libellous and prejudicial, the latter being potentially a criminal matter.

Will Griffiths have a subsequent trial or retrial? If so the article may have to be taken down c.f. Tobin. Will some fool write something stupid whilst the trial is in progress? My suspicion is that trial rules are changing with the times. The judge will accept everyone has heard about the case, will tell the jury to ignore it and will have read the discussion. However he has the power to punish anyone under his jurisdiction if he wishes and that will be very bad publicity. The article is OK at present and should be protected during the trial. Regards JRPG (talk) 23:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I don't care at all about bad publicity, I care about editors being sued. How probable is this (a)in UK (b)in EU (c)elsewhere? In any case, I support protection of the article during the trial. --Cyclopia^talk 12:53, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UK editors are potentially at risk of libel if and only if they don't cite a good source. In practice, libel is unlikely and non criminals can complain about their entry.

If a UK newspaper editor is deemed to have behaved in a way prejudicial to the trial, he is at serious risk of being hauled before the judge and given a short prison sentence for Contempt of court. In practice, a warning is given first. An UK or EU Wikipedia editor connected to a witness/accused and using their knowledge could expect a prison sentence ..and worryingly we have a few IPs making their first edit.

It's untested in the courts but I believe a UK administrator who ignored a court request is at risk as they will be presumed to understand the rules. It would be politically impossible for EU citizens to be singled out ahead of UK citizens. A US citizen is not under any UK jurisdiction.

I'd like to see the page frozen and advice from a UK solicitor. The alternative is to wait to see if any guidance is issued by the judge.

JRPG (talk) 20:58, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Philippe Kieffer was the commanding officer of 1er Bataillon de Fusiliers Marins Commandos which were No. 1 and No. 8 Troops of No. 10 (Inter-Allied) Commando. Both theses troops under Kieffer's command were assigned to No. 4 Commando of the 1st Special Service Brigade for the Normandy Landings. They landed on Sword beach 6 June 1944 D-Day and were tasked with the capture of the Casino at Ouistreham (as depicted in the movie The Longest Day (film) if you have seen that.

Omaha beach is definitely wrong. Hope this helps. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 12:26, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this Jim. I've come to the highly irritating conclusion that my Daily Torygraph source ^[1] is completely wrong and it should have been Colleville-Montgomery not Colleville-sur-mer so I've reverted my edits. It's a damn good job the commandos didn't make that sort of mistake.

Regards. JRPG (talk) 19:04, 8 June 2010 (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. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

• Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
• You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
• You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

While I'm here, could I ask you to make sure you warn the vandals you revert. twinkle can help you there if you have a compatible browser. :) Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:23, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. As often as I drop the ball, it's nice to be told when I've done something properly! Keep up the good work yourself. - Vianello (Talk) 22:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've given the IP a 12h "shot across the bows" block for that little gem. Should further blocks be necessary, they will get longer. Mjroots (talk) 18:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing a good cleanup job there. I haven't had much time today but I have noticed that George Davies (retailer) contains a lot of similar puffery, you may want to take a look at that ... next ... pablo 16:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pablo, and thanks for the (highly necessary)encouragement. Next is a local firm, many employees bought shares around the 1988 level, -which may explain their enthusiasm for putting sales dates and wondrous descriptions, all uncited, in the article. I've tried to keep it useful to marketing students but it still needs work and there are a few sections which don't fit together. Regards JRPG (talk) 20:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are in Edit history as an editor on this article. It has been multiply tagged for improvement as an alternative to being recommended for deletion. This is a request for editorial intervention to improve this article. Please help if possible.

Georgejdorner (talk) 17:11, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Georgejdorner. I followed my usual approach of adding detail from military obituaries only to find this heap. It's potentially a very interesting article which has been hijacked. I'll put more constructive comments on its talk page. Regards JRPG (talk) 17:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is just a small point but I don't think an English encyclopaedia should be using the feminine gender when referring to inanimate objects. It is largely a matter of personal preference so I think we need a ruling through a wider discussion to ensure consistency throughout Wikipedia. To get some support I searched for precedents. I found a discussion from 2004 in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive (ships as "she") which seemed to reach no conclusion, and there is also a statement in Gender-specific pronoun, though this may just be one person's opinion. This latter entry refers to The Chicago Manual of Style. This is a paid web-site so I took this lead no further. I then looked at other style guides. The BBC and The Economist are silent on the subject. However The The Guardian's style guide under the heading 'ships' is against the feminine gender (see [[2]]). However in fairness I should point out that The Times style (see [[3]]) is in favour of the feminine gender. Whether newspapers and encyclopaedias should have similar styles is debatable, but I think a standard should be defined in Wikipedia's Style Guide as well. Are you happy if a discussion point is posted there to get a clearer ruling? JMcC (talk) 12:47, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. As you say its hardly the most important point but consistency is important.

I'm not aware of any warship which isn't referred to as 'she' in Wikipedia. German battleship Bismarck, HMS Hood (51), HMS_Montagu_(1901), HMS Invincible (1907).

Similarly MS Estonia.

Regards JRPG (talk) 20:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The MoS talk page pointed out that the standard is defined in Wikiproject:Ships. You can use either it or she but you should not change gender in an article once a gender has been defined by the originator. ie you were right to revert my edit. JMcC (talk) 20:49, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just to say thanks for your kind comments at Wikipedia:Editor review/Cordless Larry‎. Hopefully together we've managed to improve the The Freedom Association article somewhat from rather inauspicious beginnings. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Larry. I'm not noted for flattery but we ended up with a much better referenced and more informative article and you did the difficult work ..so thanks to you.

Alan Meale is on my list of (relatively) local MPs and has Cypriot connections which may be of interest to you. If not, we'll still meet on the odd project. JRPG (talk) 22:39, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A later report from the BEA, released on 29 July 2011, indicated that the pilots had not been trained to fly the aircraft "in manual mode or to promptly recognize and respond to a speed-sensor malfunction at high altitude" nor was this a standard training requirement at the time of the accident.

Text before this indicates quotation from Flight safety foundation official giving the impression that the crew was specifically not instructed in flying at this altitude. The passage originally had just mention of FSF and has an article on this entity though a 'trust' type non profit, still being in endeavour to train pilots, the mention of lack of training may be in conflict with organization's self interest. The extension of what they do was added by me as a part copy verbatim from Wikipedia page on FSF Flight Safety Foundation so a conflict can at least be recognized. I believe those pilots did not need specific training; specific training can be helpful; all pilots should be able to handle such situation given time which was short and weather inclement.

I know, you also felt, on deletion of my input, that there is still something lacking and have tried to rectify as per your last input on that page around the above paragraph. All this, ironically, stems from address by the BEA in third report about lack of training, which I believe is judgmental in the least. You must have seen my input on discussion page.

I feel the section needs more work to neutralize implications of lack of training which ultimately will not hold water. Thanks.

Patelurology2 (talk) 02:26, 2 August 2011 (UTC) Patelurology2 (talk) 02:29, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• also: " meaning they don't know how an aircraft is manually handled at that altitude. " is judgmental.

Patelurology2 (talk) 02:46, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• User:Johnson487682 had participated in above and will post a copy to the respected Wikipedian.

Patelurology2 (talk) 13:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Patelurology2. Thanks for a very courteous and rational explanation of your problems with my post and please don't feel insulted that I amended what you wrote. We're both trying to make a better article -and one which won't further upset relatives. The key area of disagreement as I see it is whether Flight Safety Foundation is wp:NPOV. Could I suggest you repost on Talk:Air France Flight 447 as this keeps all article related discussions together and everyone can see it? I will do what I can to ensure we get agreement and of course will accept the majority verdict.

Regards JRPG (talk) 14:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the text you removed, a source for the fact that James Morris set up a Jobs Club as part of his campaign can be found at http://www.halesowennews.co.uk/news/local/4692065.Halesowen_and_Rowley_Regis_Job_Club_is_up_and_running/

Mj wood (talk) 10:13, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this MJ. I'll use your reference and add it -please feel free to suggest other references. In the mean time, the article would be improved by a good photo. If you have one and are willing to make it copyright free, I could help you upload it.

Regards JRPG (talk) 10:30, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have uploaded a photo but I'm not sure that I got the filter tags correct as I still seem to have some code above the photo. Could you have a look?

Regards Mj wood (talk) 14:14, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done it. I cribbed the syntax off another photo. If you can get any other MPs that would be good too. JRPG (talk) 17:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for removing the error which I foolishly made in the article on Sue Townsend. When I said that "Turnbull is an outspoken republican", I did, of course, mean "Townsend". What ever made me call her Turnbull I have no idea! Apologies about that - it was merely a slip, and you removal of it is well appreciated. With best wishes, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 14:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No probs, I've done a few of those. I saw one of her plays -showing HMQ and family moving to a rundown part of Leicester. It was surprisingly sympathetic and showed them coping well. JRPG (talk) 15:08, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JRPG. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:13, 5 August 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

WilliamH (talk) 02:13, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great to have you joining our bevy of Otters; a very rare but important wiki fauna. For Haldane I could only find this pic on flicker. It has a no-derivative licencse so its not allowed on Commons. You could upload it here under fair use. Thats if you dont mind the risk of it being attacked by the hordes of deletionists who seem to be patrolling new uploads, looking for things to destroy. I recently uploaded a pic with the same license for the 2012 Olympic hunger summit, but it only took a day for them to put it up for deletion.

Haldane's brilliant and seems to have the best social conscience of the whole court. He's not likely to come into his own though untill the Eds are installed in their rightful places at 10 & 11. While there's still loads one could say about him, I'm not sure its adviseable to build up the article too much at this point. FeydHuxtable (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Feyd. My main objective in WP:BLPs is to provide a completely fair description of people including their right of reply and subsequent events as these often change the tone of the article. I edit policians of all parties and believe a good photo improves an article -and that the subject appreciates it. Probably a long shot but I'll see what I can do. If I can find more Telegraph, BBC, Guardian, Independent articles I won't hesitate to expand the article -and would appreciate your help. I really don't expect any edit from these sources to be reverted and I don't get involved in disputes. Regards JRPG (talk) 17:54, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there JRPG! I have re-edited the Portillo article to remove the opinions of a supposed 'former lover' of Portillo.The citing of these opinions, and the naming of this person as a "former lover" of Portillo (whethe ror not in quotes), is clearly against WP:BLP, even if a third party has repeated the opinions and the alleged status of the person. WP:BLPSOURCES, WP:BLPREMOVE,and WP:BLPGOSSIP, amongst others, all refer to this. The only 'evidence' that this person was a lover of Portillo is the allegation of the person himself, and your source does not give any additional evidence. WP:BLP states clearly 'Biographies of living persons ("BLP"s) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives'. Best regards, --Smerus (talk) 18:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smerus. Whilst I don't think there was anything wrong with my post, I'm sure it can be improved. I'll get back to you in the next day or two & put a summary of your comments on the talk page. We're both experienced editors, familiar with WP:BLP and both want a better article. I really don't expect a major problem. Regards JRPG (talk) 23:19, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great. It seems to me that the problem here is that the person cited (of who little or nothing seems to be known except that he is now deceased) is alleged to have made a statement (to whom and in what circumstances?). This statement has never been put to the test, or commented on by Portillo one way or the other. It is in fact a bit reminiscent of the McAlpine affair, where something someone is alleged to have said becomes 'common knowledge'. I don't see that, even if it were fully sourced, it in any way adds to information about Portillo or his career, and it is not therefore IMO germane to the article (in the way that, for exmaple, Tebbitt's statment is germane). There was a lot of faffle about this topic sometime ago on the article, which was removed from the record by an admistrator (not me) because of WP:BLP. I think there are therefore two issues:

• 1) is this statement verifiable, other than having been made by the person who orginially issued it?
• 2) even if it were, does it add anything worthwhile to the article?

My opinion, as you will gather, is no to both, and either would I think justify passing it by. There is btw another problem in that there is a quite different (living) Nigel Hart in WP. Best, --Smerus (talk) 11:14, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smerus, and thanks for a courteous and clear reply, Artemus Jones in Hulton v Jones [1910] was a barrister and I'm relieved Hart isn't. For the record, I have no interest in people's sexual orientation and never initiate addition of such material -I contacted Oversight twice immediately following the Newsnight item. I edit controversial political articles and politicians of all parties, most commonly following wp:undue criticism of expenses and expect that the section will subsequently remain stable once the reasons are explained. I usually use wp:Suggested sources, include the right of reply and try to follow up with subsequent developments from other sources. In the case of Portillo, I was thrilled that an IP had actually provided a reference and I wanted to avoid immediate rewriting.

I do have first hand experience of working with Sunday Telegraph lawyers who checked very serious allegations I made against an individual. Andrew Roth who was very well respected would have been equally certain of his facts, would have had witnesses available, and would have been certain Portillo wouldn't sue. His MP profiles are used on a number of pages.

The item is relevant because what people belived (true or false) in the moral climate at the end of the 20th century impacted Portillo's chance of leadership, something that may seem strange 10 years hence. All I want to include:-

A few weeks after he had given this interview, the death of Alan Clark gave Portillo the opportunity to return to Parliament, despite Lord Tebbit accusing Portillo of lying about the extent of his sexual "deviance",^[1] and similar comments from an associate included in his Guardian profile.^[2]

Once that is done, I want to edit Bid for party leadership and retirement from politics

to remove the suggestion it was just right wing papers and include a summary of this from Ken Clarke. This should improve accuracy and avoid wp:undue. I'm happy alter the article along these lines and write an explanation on the talk page. Regards JRPG (talk) 18:18, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That seems very fair to me. For the sake of clarity I would suggest that , intead of 'in his Guardian profile' (which also risks suggesting the profile was 'his', i.e. authorised by him), you write 'in a profile of Portillo in the Guardian newspaper'. In the meantime I have removed the repeated insertion of N Hart 'upfront' by the anonymous WP editor. Thanks for your work and thought on this.--Smerus (talk) 20:51, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As always, a second opinion improves things. In accordance with WP:EUI I'll do it tomorrow :) JRPG (talk) 22:35, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:JRPG You explained your edit (16:09, 10 January 2013‎ ) about Richelieu 's speed, with «Remove 'Her speed was surpassed only by the fastest U.S. Navy battleships.' Faster than contemporary US and British ships yes, but Bismarck and Littorio seem at least similar speeds». May I not completely agree ? In the Siegfried Breyer's book, «Battleships and battle cruisers 1905–1970» (1973, London, Macdonald and Jane's, ISBN 0-356-04191-3) cited in the article bibliography, we can read the Richelieu 's speed was 30 knots (p.436), as Littorio(p.386), and Bismarck was credited with 29 knots (p.300). But in the same pages, the speed reached during trial runs of 32.0 knots is indicated for Richelieu (32.13 knots for Jean-Bart), 31.42 knots for Vittorio Veneto (and 31.29 for Littorio), 30.1 knots for Bismarck (and 30.8 knots for Tirpitz).Paul-Pierre Valli (talk) 13:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Salut Paul-Pierre. The problem is that sources disagree. According to Battleships and Carriers ISBN 1-84084-327-6 Bismarke was 29 knots, Richelieu 30 knots, Vittorio Veneto 32 knots. You could say that say that according to Breyer (citation needed) her trials speed was faster than her contempories Vittorio Veneto and Bismarck. As far as I'm aware only the significantly later and therefore not really comparable IOWA class ships were faster. Do you want to do this? JRPG (talk) 17:31, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, JRPG. I'm sorry you feel that way. The main point was that I considered what you had written to be inaccurate in the way you had written it. Therefore, by removing two things that did not seem to be supported by the sources you cited I thought I was improving it. I am still not entirely happy with the edit. The suggestion was made that she did not understand child protection because she was a teacher, not a social worker. My answer would be that I have never yet met a social worker with the least understanding of child protection issues (partly because social work in this country is a shambles) whereas teachers deal with it day in and day out. So actually, it would probably have helped a lot that she had no background in child protection in the medium term. The real problem appears to be that social services were trying to hide their failings from everyone, including their own bosses. If you wanted to say that she was handicapped in her management of social services by being an ex-headteacher, that would be fine. And incidentally, I have no regard for Sharon Shoesmith and I think she should have resigned over this. Her job was to force social services into behaving responsibly and professionally, which she signally failed to do. But everyone is entitled to the due process of law - except, apparently, those who have crossed Ed Balls (or any other senior politician). Hope that helps. I was not assuming bad faith - merely a slight overstatement from the sources you were using. (PS - not sure why it only had my URL rather than username before. Hope that's now corrected.)Hcc01 (talk) 08:29, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm ..I'm forced to agree that what I wrote didn't accurately follow the sources -hence the changes prompted by your edits. If we've improved the article, it's worth a few ruffled feathers! FWIW I was also on the receiving end of a constitutional round of who governs Britain, Parliament -or the monarchy in the form of the courts. I was involved in Judicial reviews and appeals with Ros Altmann and had 2 meetings with pensions minister James Purnell who overturned the Parliamentary Ombudsman's decision. I like the concept of JR's but believe that Yes Minister is fundamentally correct and it's the department not the minister of the day who makes strategic decisions like this.

The section is really maximum length for an article on Ed Balls, if you can find a suggested source that says she was handicapped in her management of social services by being an ex-head teacher, we should include it. Regards JRPG (talk) 12:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{admin help}} Could someone advise on Christian Council of Britain? As an atheist, I've no particular viewpoint on this, but was involved in merging it with a BNP related article some time ago and want to use wp:rs.
user:RevRMBWest, a WP:SPA appears to have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and I cannot get him to provide evidence that he is ordained -as others deny- or to stop editing what appears to be a fair summary of sources. Could someone ask him to provide evidence via email or whatever is appropriate? Thanks in advance. JRPG (talk) 16:41, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not allowed. All editors are automatically anonymous (unless they decide otherwise) - any attempt to link a real person to a username is called WP:OUTING. A user may decide to out themselves on their own user page - but that has to be their decision and not one they are forced into. For all you know User:RevRMBWest may just be Fred Bloggs who is a fan of Rev Robert West - there is no way of knowing which is true. If you do not agree with the user's edits and (s)he will not work with you then you must consider dispute resolution  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:23, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really vandalism? When a high-profile person edits their own BLP, it's important that we respond carefully. I'm sure the edit was inappropriate, but not all inappropriate edits are vandalism. bobrayner (talk) 12:49, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly we must NOT assume Atkinson1962 is Bloom under any circumstances, editing is anonymous -see wp:outing. Secondly there is a proper procedure for people affected by alleged errors. Writing all over the article appears to be vandalism to me. JRPG (talk) 13:35, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine the discussion could run more smoothly if you were to read policies before citing them. The lede of WP:VANDALISM says:

Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. Edit warring over content is not vandalism. Careful consideration may be required to differentiate between edits that are beneficial, detrimental but well-intentioned, and vandalizing. Mislabelling good-faith edits as vandalism can be considered harmful.

The first sentence of WP:OUTING says:

Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person had voluntarily posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia.

When a single-purpose account spends a year trying to whitewash the Godfrey Bloom article, and then repeatedly adds stuff like "PLEASE DO NOT USE THIS SPURIOUS PLACE TO FIND 'FACTS' ABOUT ME, LOG IN TO MY WEBSITE", and they sign as "Godfrey Bloom MEP", it's perfectly reasonable to treat that editor as Godfrey Bloom. It's certainly not outing when I recognise that an editor has openly and repeatedly claimed to be Godfrey Bloom.

Did you provide this advice to the editor, or was it sufficient to give them a templated warning about an irrelevant policy that they didn't break? bobrayner (talk) 14:05, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bob. I've recently had my knuckles rapped for assuming User talk:RevRMBWest belonged to a Mr RMB West -see User_talk:JRPG#Question_for_administrator. Had Bloom used GBloom as a username, of course I would have invited him to read the advice on the talkpage, but who is Atkinson and why doesn't his page say he is Bloom? I work largely on political pages & have no problems with people of any party who understand the basics before they start writing. The user could also have emailed me. Regards JRPG (talk) 15:58, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please replace the code {{admin help-helped}} on this page with {{admin help}}, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

Hi. I have instigated an investigation relating to 94.72.252.104 (talk) 94.72.252.103 (talk) and others. Is it possible to stop these utterly incomprehensible I/P messages without prejudice? I note they have also spilt over onto User talk:Katwithers5 and Talk:Natascha_Engel#Changes_in_January_2014_by_94.72.252.103_.28talk.29. Thanks in advance. JRPG (talk) 12:58, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked both IPs for making legal threats; the above thread is pretty unambiguous. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:11, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for that Yunshui 雲‍水. Now I can get on and do something useful. JRPG (talk) 13:36, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

86.135.90.128 (talk) 13:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the above IP geolocates to the same location as the previous IP users, I've blocked it as well (though a short block this time, as it's clearly a dynamic IP). Since he's probably got access to more addresses, I've taken the step of locking your talkpage against unregistered editors, which should give you a bit of peace and quiet. Let me know if you want the protection extending/reducing. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. The behaviour goes back to at least 2007. He has decided I am a sockpuppet of another user and his MP + the world in general is against him. JRPG (talk) 14:44, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Ping me if you need anything else. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:47, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Thank you for your advice - I have and am still in the process of amending the pages in line with your suggestions. The information contained was inaccurate / out of date - hence the edits made, however I will ensure more thorough citing as advised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EducationHoM (talk • contribs) 12:22, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I made a mistake while attempting to correct some grammar issues in the paragraph above the one I accidentally deleted when my computer froze. I do not add descriptions for these edits because saying you changed something from "an" to "a" for example is not terribly relevant. However as I very rarely use Wikipedia to edit I am unsure how things work. I am also unsure of the relevance of the information in the paragraph. Ianpatton5 (talk) 15:18, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ian, we all make mistakes ..or where I live get power cuts. 'Minor changes' ..getting the grammar right is important even if they don't change the meaning. I tick the 'this is a minor edit' box & use copy/edit as a summary then everyone knows what's happening. This is important as we have a lot of people doing 'test edits' on a live page just to see if it works!

Two more things, rather than edit the live page you may wish to write it up in your own sandbox & then copy/paste to to the article. You're given the option to create your own sandbox whenever you start editing a completely new article. The other suggestion is that you write a few words about yourself. Only regular editors do this & it adds to the feeling of trust. Hope that helps & I can encourage you to do some more. JRPG (talk) 20:04, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JRPG,

Cardiff Central Library has lots of local info (on the 5th floor) if you have time. I have had a quick look around online, but I cannot see anything more than that it it sustained major damage occurred to the south-west tower of the cathedral. SethWhales ^talk 19:19, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seth. Firstly, many thanks for taking the trouble to do this. I now live in Leicester & haven't visited for about 15 years & had hoped to find invoices for the repair damage. Although all records offices are now cutting back to an absurd level, I may see if I can try contacting someone or alternatively at the cathedral. Regards JRPG (talk) 08:17, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Anna Soubry may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |alt =>
• author=George Eaton|work=New Statesman|date=8 November 2013|accessdate=10 August 2014}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JRPG. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:53, 19 August 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 03:53, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

Could someone please advise on British Exploring Society?

Very sadly this organization made international headlines when a youth was killed in Norway in 2011. The organization was heavily criticized but found not guilty of criminal negligence. An WP:SPA, User talk:British Exploring has repeatedly deleted my edits claiming they are legally obliged to do so following the inquest verdict(!) and is now adding promotional material. Please see my comments on Talk:British Exploring Society. Thanks in advance. JRPG (talk) 13:00, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have user-name-soft-blocked the account, will revert his edits and explain on his talk page about COI; also that his claim is nonsense. JohnCD (talk) 13:38, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks John, I hadn't realized the username was also a problem. Regards JRPG (talk) 14:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 Israeli raids on UNRWA schools. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please try not to remove references from biographies of living persons, as you did in this edit. Cheers. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:08, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try harder next time:) The references removed didn't allow provide sufficient details to allow the swing to be calculated easily. My understanding -and I may be wrong is that the constituency article references should suffice. Anyway I think the article is now better. Regards JRPG (talk) 22:12, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JRPG, I saw your note that you plan to expand and balance the Eton article with material from a recent article in the Economist. I wanted to ask, does the Economist article mention Anthony Chenevix-Trench at all? I would guess not if it focuses on recent developments, but I'm always on the lookout for further sources even if they only say a few words.

With Chenevix-Trench available sources are a maddening mixture of glowing late 1960's BBC documentaries and equally glowing press reports of the same era, sensationalist tabloid and similar material of later eras taking the opposite view, and a more balanced and more detailed biography that unfortunately is somewhat self-published. Can't win! Thanks. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:15, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Belated greetings Demiurge I want to provide info in connection with how the school keeps its academic record & a measure of its performance independent of "the old boy network." Following your request, I looked at various articles about AC-T and ..you're right, this is a difficult one. There's quite a lot of non-encyclopedia quality material with allegations of sadistic behaviour but I couldn't find anything better than what you already have. In short, I think you've already found all you are going to get. Regards JRPG (talk) 16:04, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Application of sharia law by country. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Rob Marris.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:06, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've written a comment to the talk page on the John Major article; it is something you also discussed last year. I wanted to give you a heads up about it before editing the article itself. Purplethree (talk) 14:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly greetings Purple & welcome to my talk page. I edit mostly politicians and shipwrecks, both are surprisingly contentious! I've never got involved in a serious dispute with a non-I/p who uses talk pages and have never had discussions which haven't ended with both sides fairly satisfied. In short, this issue can/will be sorted. Regards JRPG (talk) 15:31, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Anna Soubry page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:49, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete your second vote in the Libertarian Party AfD [4]. Relisting does not mean those who voted in the first listing have another chance to vote, it is a continuation of the same AfD. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:09, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing it. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:20, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I made the change to this page as what was there when I read it was factually incorrect and biased. Many of the media outlets amended the story as Karl did not respond to the tweet in question by Richard Davies (as the Telegraph article points out) but made a reply to another user much later in the day who had picked up on the debate. In truth this whole section is little more than a biased attempt to smear Mr M^cCarney and I as a life-long friend feel that this really has no place on Wikipedia and especially as you claim to be against any bias Millionblade (talk) 09:15, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Millionblade and thanks for your comments, FWIW I don't use twitter at all. I read articles carefully but had missed the point that the response was apparently aimed at a 3rd party. Editing Wikipedia is often contentious, as a general point you may want to look at WP:AGF and WP:COI. Regards JRPG (talk) 21:07, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a straw poll that may interest you regarding the proper use of "Religion =" in infoboxes of atheists.

The straw poll is at Template talk:Infobox person#Straw poll.

--Guy Macon (talk) 09:29, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sri Lankan presidential election, 2015. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:BUSM 1916 Shell casing manufacture.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Stefan2 (talk) 15:43, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you remove referenced comments about Andrew Bridgen which relate to previous content in the same section, and reflect accurately comments contained in newspaper sources, and which contain claims which are true?Woodsman2013 (talk) 23:25, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ..I've replied on the article talk page as its best if all article discussion is kept together. It should be easy to get an agreement. Regards JRPG (talk) 00:23, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 Cairns child killings. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I remember that you're quite experienced with BLP issues. I've not edited for a while, so am a bit out of the loop. Do you have any sense of the consensus about the applicability of BLP policy to groups. I've looked at WP:BLPGROUP, but I wonder what the sense is regarding large groups (I'm involved in a debate about Somalis in the United Kingdom, where another editor claims BLP applies as Somalis in the UK are living people. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:46, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2015 Copenhagen attacks. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I replied to your revert on Talk:Roger Helmer. cagliost (talk) 07:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See this on your userpage. —George8211 / T 21:36, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Jonathan Arnott page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Democratic Party (United States). Legobot (talk) 00:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikipedia Library Users,

You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see Wikipedia:HighBeam/Citations
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Paul Singer (businessman). Legobot (talk) 00:05, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some weeks ago, you alerted me to the antics of 80.2.172.185 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Well, they just resumed their well-tried behavior, so I've sent them off for three months. Favonian (talk) 17:35, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Favonian, they deserve a long break :) JRPG (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Liz Kendall.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 16:06, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: Greetings BHG & thanks for the help you've given me in the past on various politics wp:BLP articles. I've just created an article on Bernard Davis (British Empire Medal holder) but found to my sorrow that he's not appeared in the surname order in Category:Recipients of the British Empire Medal that I expected. Any advice appreciated. Regards JRPG (talk) 18:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JPRG!

You need DEFAULTSORT, which I have just added to the article as {{DEFAULTSORT:Davis, Bernard}} in this edit.

I also added a few other categories. Hope this helps :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks once again! JRPG (talk) 18:39, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:08, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of largest cities in the European Union by population within city limits. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: Greetings again BHG. The Daily Telegraph has cited a number of pages as having being been blanked raising "suspicion MPs or their political parties deliberately hid information from the public online to make candidates appear more electable to voters." It's one thing when an overenthusiastic supporter does it & quite another when it comes from Parliament. Grant_Shapps has also been doing the same thing & I'm neither amused nor impressed. What is the best way to get this issue raised with intent to stop it happening at the next election? FWIW, having seen problems with a number of pages in 2010, I would like to see an assumption of paid editing from Parliament and a ban on IP editing of political BLPs in an election year. Regards JRPG (talk) 18:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JRPG, off the the top of my head, I can think of a few ways of approaching this:

1. Name and shame: Use news reports such as this to write an article on political abuse of Wikipedia, and note such abuses in the biographical articles. It would need to be solidly based in news reports and other reliable sources, but if such an article could be constructed it would would ensure that any such antics remain on the record.
2. Seek co-operation. The WMF (or its UK chapter) could ask the relevant political bodies )parties, Speaker etc) to support Wikipedia's principles and help try to stamp this out. That could include add a no-vanity-editing clause to IPSA's codes of conduct, which would have real teeth.
3. Monitor. Lots of neutral editors to watch the articles and stamp on any such games.

None of those is an exclusive option; any combination of some or all of the above would be good.

My favourite is #3, active NPOV editors monitoring the articles, because it's how Wikipedia is supposed to work. Sadly, a decline in the number of editors has happened as the number of articles has grown, so the ratio of articles to active editors is getting dangerously low. Unless that ratio improves, this problem will get worse, not just in Westminster politics but across most topics :( --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:38, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: Thanks for that. I'm editing all pages referenced to highlight the behaviour of these people & the strong language used in the Telegraph. I'll wait to see what the response is. I'll wait a few days to see what develops but I may need advice on an address for contacting WMF. I'm quite used to writing to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. Regards JRPG (talk) 21:00, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Bernard Davis (British Empire Medal holder), JRPG!

Wikipedia editor Ceyockey just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Should provide additional citations to support the article. If none are forthcoming, consider merging to the 'british empire medal' article as a 'youngest recipient' section.

To reply, leave a comment on Ceyockey's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Derry. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your advice, help and support. May I draw your attention to a new section on Poverty in the David Cameron article. Fighting Poverty (talk) 09:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bit short of time atm. I expect the Cameron article will be vigorously pruned -see wp:BRD as most contributions are ..but as you have wp:rs you can rewrite it meeting those complaints. Always assume people want a neutral article and are trying to be helpful. Some are! I usually get my own point across and can help you do the same with yours. Regards JRPG (talk) 14:31, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re Osborne, can I suggest you persist with the excellent Independent article ..but NOT the daily Record -a tabloid. See wp:Suggested sources. Remove the existing article from the lead -as someone will probably do anyway. :) Add a section intended to give his political views on foodbanks. Say that according to the Independent he has never visited one -see WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV claiming they are not part of the welfare system. Add that he was criticized by .. You can also wp:BRD as the reason for the reinsertion. I would expect it to stay. JRPG (talk) 15:24, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm copying this to my talk page so I can get to the links easily. Fighting Poverty (talk) 07:20, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fighting Poverty, I note that David Mundell has just opened a new foodbank. JRPG (talk) 18:45, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Fighting Poverty: This may be of interest ..if and only if you have time. Regards JRPG (talk) 19:51, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter¹²³ (spout) @ 15:52, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Rcsprinter123 I have added probably excessive bytes to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/WikiProject desk/Interviews but suspect I've put it in the wrong place! Please advise. Regards JRPG (talk) 11:38, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, you've done everything just fine. Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (intone) @ 13:04, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:UK Independence Party. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Snowded, I note in the RFC "We probably have a meat farm" ..I've even resorted to Urban dictionary but have completely failed to understand. Could you please enlighten me? Regards JRPG (talk) 13:36, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is where editors a recruited off wiki to edit an article ----Snowded ^TALK 14:45, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Added to dictionary, thanks for the education!

Hello JPRG,

Your colleague, IgnorantArmies, has mistakenly formed the opinion that I have engaged in disruptive editing -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Glenn_Oliver#First_and_only_warning:_disruptive_editing

I would appreciate it if you would review that thread and the article to which it refers.

Many thanks, Glenn Glenn Oliver (talk) 16:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Glenn Oliver: Glenn, FWIW Peter Bone the article seems as contentious as Peter Bone the MP & I don't know why. Your edit had the old 2010 majority but I haven't seen any evidence of anything other than positive contributions from either you or IgnorantArmies hence my surprise at the activity on 27th July. I've been away but Keith D also patrols the page & will have formed his own opinion. We want a better article and WP:AGF should apply. Regards JRPG (talk) 18:01, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JPRG,

I appreciate your response.

I also don't know why those apparent disruptive edits took place; my guess would be some sort of software bug, but it's not clear why it occurs only on that page.

Glenn Glenn Oliver

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of urban areas by population. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United Nations. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sex offender registries in the United States. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odirjmm (talk • contribs) 22:12, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi (Odirjmm If this is your first article its a difficult choice because Wikipedia is used as a source of medical advice in the US, hence strict guidelines on sources. Basically the Mail is a tabloid, they're not noted for scientific accuracy and we're asked to avoid them. According to WP:Suggested_sources#Current_news one should "generally avoid British tabloids such as the Daily Mail, Daily Express, The Mirror and The Sun. "According to WP:BLPSOURCES, Material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism. When material is both verifiable and noteworthy, it will have appeared in more reliable sources.

Medical articles have a higher source requirement still, e.g. the Lancet or BMJ. I've asked on the talk page if anyone objects to a one liner about Lavigne. If no one does, I'd prefer you add it -without offering Avril's possibly spurious descriptions of the disease! Regard JRPG (talk) 22:38, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Umpqua Community College shooting. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm hoping to find some common ground here, as you have restored (possibly without meaning to) a large number of egregious edits, not just those for BUSM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.149.149.209 (talk) 11:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

i apologise. for clarity: sir isaac is our treasure i didn't really mean to attack *you* it was more directed towards khalili. i felt khalili deserved it, as the entire situation embodied the very dangers i feared when i first came across his attempts on this subject (undermining sir isaac to oversell his hero al hazen). if you ask me, khalili's nonsense has no place in a highly cited publication like Nature (but as we know, thanks to Pubpeer or the STAP scandal, that Nature is part of the problem).

sir isaac newton is a commonwealth treasure. it can be argued his work was not only inspiring, influential and enlightening to all of Her Majesty's subjects, but a central part of justifying the vast riches we had accrued (at the time, and now).

anyways i just wanted to apologise to you because i wanted you to know i didn't intend to attack anyone, but express my frustration at the entire situation. i will protect our national treasures where necessary, and i guess i hurt some feelings (which again, i'm sorry for)

now that it's resolved i doubt there will be problems. cheers.96.52.168.137 (talk) 23:13, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Accepted of course. FWIW I had read all the notes carefully and will put a note on the talk page tomorrow suggesting what I think can be agreed. Don't lose too much sleep over it:) Regards JRPG (talk) 23:36, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Honourable. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:AndyReed-MP&Family.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 object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:52, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States presidential election, 2020. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Harry Harpham, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PPS. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:42, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JRPG. Apologies that I meant to reply to your comments a couple of months ago. I got sidetracked by some other things a couple of months ago and then later forgot to actually reply back in December 2015. I found it interesting reading the Northampton Sekhemka statue article and the background details from the references to the article as well. Living in Surrey and not locally in Northamptonshire, I didn't know much of the background surrounding the controversy of Northampton Museum and Art Gallery selling the statue and then having its accreditation removed by the Arts Council England.

Normally a quick refill of the references can be done in just a minute or so. It is a quick process. But because I found the article and the references interesting to read, I decided to spend more time on it by doing a more complete tidy up of the references than what a quick refill can achieve.

I like to help with the tidying up of references, so it's no problem at all if there are any other articles in the future you would like me to do a quick refill on. I'd be happy to help and there's no need to feel any guilt at all regarding asking me for assistance with the Northampton Sekhemka statue article, as I liked reading about it and therefore spending the extra time on it. Regards, Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 21:47, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would I like it? -I'd be thrilled! JRPG (talk) 21:56, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kind Tennis Fan I appreciate this may be both outside the scope of "a quick refill" and your range of healthy peaceful interests but is there any automatic way of getting Matilda I (tank) reference style to look more like the style of Quintinshill rail disaster? The latter is well worth a read. If not, is it possible to ask for it to be developed as a tool? Regards JRPG (talk) 18:43, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Socialism. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

JRPG - we have reverted the changes made to Baroness Joanna Shields Wikipedia page (which are in no way missleading) for the following reasons. 1. The Times article erroneously included a reference to Shields but this was corrected and it no longer references Joanna Shields or any involvement on her part. 2. This story and allegation is not related to Shields who left the company in 2012. The story is about accounts filed in November 2015 for the 2014 year for which she has no part as she left the company in 2012. 3. In Shields role she was developing products and building operations and team for Facebook not tax policies. She was never a registered director of the company at companies house. Her remit did not include tax policy so this is completely innacurate. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06331310/filing-history 4. Showing this, CLEARLY information is misleading and inaccurate HENCE WHY IT HAS BEEN REVERTED.

Cjlewis43 (talk) 23:18, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Women in Football requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. NottNott talk|contrib 10:46, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

JRPG, this article was speedily deleted because it did not meet the criteria for a Wikipedia article about an orginisation: apart from one mention in The Guardian, there was no other significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Yes, I have read the organisation's website; but until the organisation itself gets significant media coverage, it won't have a Wikipedia article. Please feel free to ask me any questions about this, or about anything else Wikipedia related. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly greetings Shirt58 and NottNott. I admit I was astonished at the speed with which this article disappeared. I was still peacefully justifying its existence/visiting the page when it all vanished Paul Daniels style! wp:NORUSH clearly didn't apply. Nicky Morgan -the only other article I started which was similarly threatened was reprieved for a week by which time its significance was obvious.

Egghead06 had added a red link on Eva Carneiro and I hoped by notifying him that I'd started it he would be able to contribute.

Without invoking wp:CRYSTAL I expect the article to be significantly expanded following the expected appointment of a new Chelsea manager who is expected to deal with her mistreatment. This is much more a political and legal article than a football one.

Here are 4 WP:RS & a few others. -Note I wouldn't regard the FA as a reliable source even they could spell 'survey'

• http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/mar/08/women-in-football-report-ingrained-sexist-culture
• http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/31765646
• http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/03/08/sexism-occurs-daily-in-football-reports-reveals/
• http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/31754477
• http://www.skysports.com/football/news/12040/10196222/survey-shows-61-per-cent-of-women-in-football-have-witnessed-sexism
• http://www.hrreview.co.uk/hr-news/diversity-news/women-in-football-survey/50925
• http://www.thefa.com/news/fawsl/2014/mar/women-in-football-survery-results-070314
• http://www.espnfc.co.uk/barclays-premier-league/story/2478574/women-in-football-log-55-incidents-this-season

Assuming it can now meet the criteria, is there any problem recreating it including some new links? Regards JRPG (talk) 19:48, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Monarchy of Canada. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Morgan Morgan-Giles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transom. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:13, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - and thanks for your remarks on the Talk page; you will see that I have responded. Best wishes, 45ossington (talk) 08:10, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look! Best regards, Messirulez (talk) 21:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I glanced through it and didn't really notice anything missing in the article...the Irish Times article also mentioned that the director of the company was José Manuel García Osuna, who was also later a majority shareholder of Castellón, and I'm guessing you took it out as it wasn't really necessary to include, so I think it should be ok as it is! I'm guessing you're a Leicester City F.C. fan in that case? If so, good luck, I would really like to see the club win the title, they've had such an incredible season! Best, Messirulez (talk) 23:09, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly thanks for looking at it. I originally removed material which I thought could potentially fall foul of the fierce UK libel laws but was also concerned not to sanitize any tax avoidance or worse and José Manuel García Osunawas removed under wp:BLPNAMES. However you have confirmed I have no need to worry. I am a indeed Leicester City supporter and had expected a good season after the brilliant way they avoided relegation. However no one expected such results under Claudio. I guess everyone had a point to prove! JRPG (talk) 17:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, I have looked at your recent advice following a recent edit I did, and I have now used a stronger source for my information on a new edit in this section. It makes sense now why it was changed and I am very thankful to you for pointing this out to me. Hopefully what I've got done now is ok, I just feel this is very relevant information that is worth noting in this section of the Leicester City page. I am so sorry if this has caused any inconvenience for you, I was only trying to help improve this wiki page through my own knowledge which I really wanted to share. Thank you very much for your understanding. I'm a fellow Leicester City fan myself! Up the Foxes. Feel free to take a look at my new edit. AlexMlcfc (talk) 21:24, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, I think the Economist article you added was brilliant & I had intended to thank you. I suspect business text books will be changed contrasting Chelsea's motivation last season and this with Leicester. Every Leicester player had a point to prove. Don't remember too much about Forest other than it was Brian Clough and was a real achievement by a top manager. I do seem to remember a quite recent German national team doing very well with 2nd division quality players who trained together every week. Many sources seem to think Leicester's achievements this year are unique so someone may remove the reference to Forest. As someone living in Leicester I may be biased! Regards JRPG (talk) 21:14, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, again. Sorry, I seemed to have removed the Econmist article as I got confused, I thought you wanted that article changed, but never mind, my fault entirely. If you or another user wants to remove my edit about the Forest link, then that's absolutely fine. Perhaps Blackburn or Ipswich's achievements would be better linked? Just a thought. I've lived in Leicester all my life, I remember the league one days etc. Amazing to see how far we've come. All the best and thanks again for your understanding. AlexMlcfc| (AlexMlcfc) 23:22 6 May 2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexMlcfc (talk • contribs) 22:22, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your post on the Llandaff Cathedral talk page. I tried searching at the link you gave, but couldn't find anything about the storm. Thought there might be something in the old Welsh newspapers collection, but they don't start until 100 years after the storm.

Many of the sources used in the article are from Google Books and HathiTrust, both of which don't allow full viewing of many books outside of the US because of possible copyright issues. It seems to me that they could permit viewing but not copying outside of the US because there's just so much material of historic nature on both sites from non-US countries.

Not sure if you can access this 1719 account of the cathedral:

• A Survey of the Cathedral-Church of Landaff: Browne Willis, 1719, R. Gosling.

His recap of the storm is on page 2. This is what Willis wrote about it:

"This is a handsome Tower (Jasper Tower), all but the Battlements at Top, which were elegant enough, and entire, until the great Storm November 27, 1703, which threw down two of the Corner-Pinnacles and a good Part of the Battlements; the Wind, being Southerly, threw the Stones into the Church-yard. This Tower, which is ascended by 140 Free-stone steps, is in Heighth, from the lower-Moulding at Top to the Bottom, 29 Yards and a Half; the Battlements are 8 Foot deep; the Square at Top is 21 Foot and a Half North and South, and 22 Foot east and West; and at Bottom, on the West Side (where there are three handsome Windows one over another) it is 29 Foot long."

Other later accounts seem to be either quoting or referring to what Willis wrote, regarding how the storm damaged the cathedral. We hope (talk) 14:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings We hope and thanks for the work which you've already put into this article. I was a student in Cardiff many years ago and have a Rhondda coalmining ancestry. I lived in Whitchurch and admired the cathedral. I had expected that the records office might have details & drawings as I generally avoid Google books on WW2 topics due to copyright questions. Given the date of these articles, I don't think there's a problem though I would add a comment about the source. Feel free to add it ..or I will in a day or two. Regards JRPG (talk) 18:38, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Democratic Party presidential debates and forums, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Could not find the person in the reference. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:32, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Doc James: Sorry, I don't understand ..are you referring to me? JRPG (talk) 21:50, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Osgood%E2%80%93Schlatter_disease&diff=prev&oldid=723535776 Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:10, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bennett_(cyclist) FWIW he lived in my home town of Solihull, I went on holiday with him & I do remember that he got a bronze medal in the 1972 track pursuit Olympics. However I had no idea he had OS. Regards JRPG (talk) 22:26, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Alan West, Baron West of Spithead page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fully agree with the decision to remove the image from the Newport page. Just never got around to it myself! Best wishes. The joy of all things (talk) 17:28, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fully expected I was going to get a roasting from an outraged photographer! Very surprised anyone didn't offer a better one. Regards JRPG (talk) 20:26, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now you've got it in two places... Pinkbeast (talk) 02:03, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JRPG. I see someone has changed the photo back to the one I recently uploaded. Just a quick note to say that if you feel strongly about this, feel free to revert back to the one you prefer. I thought you made good points in you revert back the the original photo. I switched as I thoughy the new one, despite its problems, looked a bit nicer than the old one which to my eyes looked a bit "witch-like"! But I do not feel strongly about this, so if you do, don't hold back for me. Rwendland (talk) 16:03, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Rwendland. I've added a few photos for politicians of both main parties & strongly believe that this is the only aspect of their BLP where they should have a say. I probably appeared more offended than I was but I did think the official photo was safe. I'll leave it for now. Regards JRPG (talk) 16:28, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that (a) WP:WTAF is only an essay, (b) it does not really deal within the body of its text with the creation of red links in articles. There is absolutely no problem with creating red links to notable subjects in articles. This is explained in WP:REDYES. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:23, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings & belated thanks for thisNecrothesp, as the essay was the only guidance I was aware of. I do show due diligence in searching for an article but although I'd heard of the Independent Schools Information Service, I hadn't found other references. Regards JRPG (talk) 10:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Boris Johnson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NO2. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:SIG MCX. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JRPG,

I have been editing this page to try and be more neutral and then the other editor with a vested interest in attacking the person has replaced all my edits with very biased language. Furthermore the information included far surpasses any other similar page - because it was first put there by a malicious editor. The information included is excessive and irrelevant.

Please can you assist me in making the page neutral and non-biased, with all information that is actually relevant to a back-bench politician, and I will cease to make any further edits as I believe you to be a non-biased editor.

Regards

Megggg6543 (talk) 16:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I'm very pleased you responded -except for Ukip pages, I've never had a serious argument with anyone who uses the talk page. If necessary, I can also ask for an impartial view but the rules allow for addition of material from a wp:Reliable source and rarely allow it to be removed unless it can be shown to be wrong. I tend to use UK versions of wp:Suggested sources which are rarely challenged or challengable if properly attributed. Regards JRPG (talk) 16:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now that further content from the page has been deleted by another editor, which was factual and most of which was appropriately sourced, the article is seriously biased and has been edited maliciously initially by a source known to have a motive against the subject. I would like to request assistance in creating a non-biased account of the person please. I will then stop editing the page. Megggg6543 (talk) 09:57, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Megg. I'm away for a couple of days at least & very short of time. I'm really not sure why some of the material was deleted. Ask the editor on the talk page why it was deleted & I'll look at it in much more detail when I return. JRPG (talk) 10:18, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States presidential election, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JRPG. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sciences Po. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for transferring the comment from the article to the Talk page. I was going to do so, but got involved in family problems! With best regards, David J Johnson (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David -just get back to the family & put them first, in short have a happy Christmas :) JRPG (talk) 22:46, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have a good Christmas too. Best, David, David J Johnson (talk) 23:08, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on File talk:Conscription map of the world.svg. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States presidential election, 2000. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, reason for removing the Dornier and Catalina - they are a different configuration (2 engines as opposed to 4) and the Catalina is a Parasol wing. Regards80.229.34.113 (talk) 14:18, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. Wikipedia suffers a lot from vandals deleting or sneakily altering text without giving a reason & that's what I thought had happened here. I know quite a bit about airborne radar and ASW though I'm no expert on the Sunderland. Could I politely suggest you register? I'll then recognise you and am highly unlikely to revert you in future. Regards JRPG (talk)

Thanks for altering the reference. I genuinely couldn't remember which way he voted and struggled to find a decaffeinate source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulharding150 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to be of help. I really don't like the Daily Mail though I have a lot of respect for Jeff Prestridge of the Mail on Sunday who helped our group -and checked his facts. JRPG (talk) 18:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Immigration and crime. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Southern Poverty Law Center. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Regarding the edit I made, Anna responded to a tweet by Guido Fawkes by saying that she had joined the Liberal Party aged 17, then the Conservatives at 19. I didn't want to put Twitter as a source, but here is the Tweet https://twitter.com/Anna_Soubry/status/847507088339222528 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomdff (talk • contribs) 21:37, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that Tomdff. On balance of probability I think she did join the Liberals at that point -but that won't suffice particularly if she says she didn't.

FWIW Ros Altmann who I know and admire was a member of all 3 parties around 2010! Regards JRPG (talk) 22:12, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

She said she did...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomdff (talk • contribs) 23:59, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

my edit clarified the question an earlier editor raised "There has been debate about whether other member states," so I specified the two major ones people are talking of Grexit and Nexit

if you feel this is speculation you should remove the paragraph

BernardZ (talk)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Protests against Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Talk:Nigel Farage". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 7 May 2017.

The request for formal mediation concerning Talk:Nigel Farage, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

Hi JRPG. Just a note to thank you for helping improve Romeo and Juliet, but also fair warning that the bit in question will probably get removed next time someone (possibly me) makes a cleanup sweep over the article. On the Shakespeare articles there is just so much material, over such a long period of time, and so much high-quality scholarship, that modern events like these just simply do not measure up in the vast majority of cases (there are, of course, exceptions). While I know some other editors would remove it immediately (since it's a FA), I'm of the general opinion that it's no big deal to let interesting bits like this sit for a while, provided they are well written and well sourced, as was the case here, of course. Longer term I wouldn't be able to justify keeping it; I just don't think there's any urgent need to remove it. In any case, I just wanted to thank you, and give an explanation, so you don't feel your contribution was unappreciated when it is, most likely, removed somewhere down the line. --Xover (talk) 14:28, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Xover -I don't suppose either of us will lose too much sleep on this! My original comment was almost an invitation to remove because of the structure but on reflection its in the wrong article. I was shocked but it tells us much more about the quality of the top people in the exam boards than about the play and the tabloids had a field day. Regards JRPG (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dick Cheney. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

You added a dubious label to an article I follow very closely.

What part of the statement do you find dubious ? The normal range for testicular volume is normally quoted in radiography papers as being between 15 and 25 ml (or cubic centimetres) in most articles with an average of about 20 ml, depending on what paper you read. I wrote 30ml as the upper range as that is the upper value that was quoted in the article I was reading at the time. There is always going to be a variation in the volumes stated, depending of whether the measurement was done by ultrasound or Prader orchidometer.

I can change it from 30 to 25 ml.

Testicular volumes of 3ml and less are commonly found in adult patients with Kallmann syndrome, it is a key feature of the syndrome. All the medical papers I have cited in the article would list 3 or 4ml as being the cut off value for testicular volume.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Neilsmith38 (talk • contribs) 08:05, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Neilsmith38: Hi Neil & thanks for a speedy response. I accept I made a mistake -probably because I expect a volume in ml and overlooked the cm superscript. FWIW I think it might be slightly better to use ml as its an SI unit. If you have a one liner about systematic measurement variations that might also be helpful to patients. I'll self revert shortly. Regards JRPG (talk) 09:44, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Thanks for your message. The link to the article about my father is apparently from the BBC who have got his name wrong. I was notified of this by my son this morning who inturn was asked by a friend if he knew who the mystery person was. As the article never mentioned that he was deputy mayor at the time, I added that too. Kerry Douglas Ronan (talk) 21:17, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that you have reverted a string of IP edits on the Leicester page and wondered if you could take a look at a similar set of edits by the IP to Leicester Urban Area which may need reverting as well. Thanks. Keith D (talk) 11:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Keith & thanks for the advice. I spoke earlier to BrownHairedGirl as she is a template expert. She believes they are good faith but should be removed & reinstated if appropriate. His latest is the removal of a duplicate full stop -which took me 3 mins to find! I've put a note on his page and will look at Leicester Urban Area but it may be more difficult. Regards JRPG (talk) 15:09, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Attempted assassination of Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of United States presidential assassination attempts and plots. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, pardon me for being abrupt! Still new to this one! Of course, the whole betting partner thing about the stadium of Leicester was commercial. Thus, it was written in the Sponsors section. Everything it is about money and advertising in the sponsorship section. Still informative though. Why was it wrong? It is the essence of the free economy and free movement of people and funds (EU and human rights treaties) that allows it. Thanks for the edit. Fares57 (talk) 11:00, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:March 2017 Île-de-France attacks. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Political appointments by Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Drudge Report. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JRPG. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Pink tide. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Knights of Columbus. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Political appointments by Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Douma chemical attack. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm contacting you as an active contributor on brewery articles and/or member of WikiProject Beer. There is some discussion going on as to how we should name our brewery articles. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Beer#Change_brewery_titles? and Talk:Greene_King_Brewery#Requested_move_10_May_2018. If you are interested, please comment. SilkTork (talk)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Douma chemical attack. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Meaningful vote. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Israel. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2018 Kerala floods. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ben Shapiro. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JRPG. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Syrian Civil War. Legobot (talk) 04:43, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:SNC-Lavalin affair. Legobot (talk) 04:35, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Three Worlds Theory. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:China–United States trade war. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mick Mulvaney. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Dayton shooting. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:People's Party of Canada. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Asia. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2020 United States House of Representatives elections. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Obamagate on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:43, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Edward Argar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nick Robinson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Queen Letizia of Spain on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Australian Labor Party on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:New York City Police Department on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Cynthia Lummis on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:07, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation) on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Anti-abortion movements on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Holodomor in modern politics on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Antisemitism in Europe on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:32, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox country on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Userboxes on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Azov Battalion on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Azov Battalion on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Dead cat strategy on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Depp v. Heard on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Proclamation of accession of Elizabeth II on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Likud on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:39, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2022 annexation referendums in Russian-occupied Ukraine on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Dorothy Moon on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:New York City on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Death and funeral of Constantine II of Greece on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:West Herzegovina Canton on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Serbia on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ben Roberts-Smith on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Republic of Artsakh on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald Trump on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:ELAM (Cyprus) on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JRPG! You're receiving this notification because you were previously subscribed to the Feedback Request Service, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over six months.

In order to declutter the Feedback Request Service list, and to produce a greater chance of active users being randomly selected to receive invitations to contribute, you've been unsubscribed, along with all other users who have made no edits in six months.

You do not need to do anything about this - if you are happy to not receive Feedback Request Service messages, thank you very much for your contributions in the past, and this will be the last you hear from the service. If, however, you would like to resubscribe yourself, you can follow the below instructions to do so:

1. Go to the Feedback Request Service page.
2. Decide which categories are of interest to you, under the RfC and/or GA headings.
3. Paste {{Frs user|JRPG|limit}} underneath the relevant heading(s), where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month.
4. Publish the page.

If you've just come back after a wikibreak and are seeing this message, welcome back! You can follow the above instructions to re-activate your subscription. Likewise, if this is an alternate account, please consider subscribing your main account in much the same way.

Note that if you had a rename and left your old name subscribed to the FRS, you may be receiving this message on your new username's talk page still. If so, make sure your new account name is subscribed to the FRS, using the same procedure mentioned above.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the Feedback Request Service talk page, or on the Feedback Request Service bot's operator's talk page. Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]