Jump to content

User talk:YellowMonkey/Archive174

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)[edit]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue LI (May 2010)
From the coordinators

With Eurocopter's resignation (see editorial below), this month marks the end of his tenure as a project coordinator. Eurocopter has been with the team for almost three years now and will be sorely missed, but he has taken the tough decision that his real life commitments have unfortunately made it too hard for him to focus on his coordinator duties. We wish him good luck in the future, both in real life and on-wiki.

Efforts to redesign The Bugle are moving forward and it is our intention to roll out a new format, based on the Signpost, for next month's issue. We hope that this will allow us to provide better coverage of the project's news by allowing more room to expand on the stories we bring to you. If you have any comments or suggestions on what we can do to improve coverage, please let us know.

—your IX Coordinator Tranche, May 2010

Articles of note

New featured articles:

  1. Action of 1 August 1801
  2. Battle of Villers-Bocage
  3. Brian Eaton
  4. HMAS Australia (1911)
  5. HMS Lion (1910)
  6. Japanese battleship Tosa

New featured lists:

  1. List of battleships of Germany

New A-Class articles:

  1. 102nd Intelligence Wing
  2. Battle of Quebec (1775)
  3. Bombing of Yawata (June 1944)
  4. Deutschland class battleship
  5. Indiana class battleship
  6. Russian battleship Slava
  7. SMS Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand
  8. SMS Hannover
  9. William Ellis Newton
Project news
  • With consensus reached on a name the American Civil War task force has officially opened our newest special project. Codenamed Brothers at War, its goal will be "...to improve [US Civil War] related Wikipedia articles to featured status, and to see as many of these as possible appear on the main page on their respective 150th anniversaries."
  • The straw poll concerning preemptive disambiguation of military units as outlined by our Manual of Style has been closed, with near unanimous consensus that the current practice of preemptive disambiguation be retained. Thanks to everyone who participated in either the discussion or the straw poll.
  • Members of Operation Majestic Titan have adopted a three-tiered award system to show appreciation to those who have done work on battleship or battlecruiser articles. Formally known as the Titan's Cross, the award has been issued to Parsecboy, Climie.ca, The ed17, and MBK004.
  • The project's official IRC channel (#wikipedia-en-milhist) has been restarted. Project members and anyone interested in military history are encouraged to join us for substantive discussions, social discourse and a few laughs. Instructions on how to get on IRC are available here.
Contest department
Awards and honours
Editorial: Project coordination and constructive editing

For those of you who might not know me, I'm Eurocopter. I served as a coordinator of the Military history WikiProject from August 2007 until few days ago, when I decided to resign due to real life issues making it impossible for me to continue to perform project duties on a regular basis. Reflecting on my experience and activities within the project, I decided to write this editorial to set out a few thoughts and offer some advice to interested members.

First of all, what does project coordination mean and how does it help the Military history WikiProject? Although the coordinators do not have any real executive powers, they play an important role in project management. To make editing contributions easier for our members we establish guidelines, manage Peer and A-Class reviews, and consult and assist when needed. The primary goal of the coordination team has always been to stimulate the development of quality articles and, once they have been developed, to facilitate maintaining them at a high standard for as long as possible. This has been carried out through the organization of a considerable number of assessment drives, contests and special projects. However, there is still much to be done to make the project one of the best and most active wiki-communities. Coordinator involvement in trying to achieve this, as the central promoters of any activity undertaken within the project, is more than important; the coordination team should stand as an example of civilised and constructive cooperation. Perhaps the most annoying issue—unfortunately quite widespread through the pages of Wikipedia—is POV-dominated conflict. While such a phenomenon might seem inevitable in a community within which hundreds of members of different nationalities with different historical and political views interact, it doesn’t mean we should accept it. The ability to neutrally mediate such conflicts is an important and desirable coordinator function.

Secondly, but most importantly in my opinion, is the question of how the project enables editors to contribute effectively. Perhaps you already know how difficult it is to take an article to the highest quality levels such as A-Class or featured status. It is even harder to do this working alone. I believe the best thing the Military history WikiProject has done is to bring together groups of editors with similar interests. As there are very few editors skilled in all the diverse article development areas, you might feel the need for help from editors more experienced in, for example, advanced copy editing, image editing etc. To this end the project provides task forces and special projects where members should always feel encouraged to ask questions, discuss, debate and give advice. Such cooperation is the best way to create properly balanced articles and to establish a neutral point of view. Our Style guide and Academy are also useful in guiding you along the path of writing an article. A final, but vital, part of the collaborative article writing process is editor behaviour when interacting with other editors who are contributing to the same article. Even on those occasions where an editor upsets you or allows their personal opinions to influence their editing, always remain calm, civil and try to reach an agreement. Contributing to Wikipedia is something most of us do as a hobby; time spent in useless conflicts is precious editing time wasted.

All in all, the Military history WikiProject is a good meeting point for milhist-interested editors, both beginners and advanced, with someone always there to give help and advice when needed. I wish to thank all my fellow coordinators and project members who keep this beautiful community running. I will certainly miss it!

Best regards and happy wiki-editing! Eurocopter (talk) 20:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 June 2010[edit]

Javed Burki[edit]

Your Pro India Bias is well documented as is your Prejudice Editing of "Javed Burki". It is also documented how you misled Wiki when disabeling TestKhan. Please be advised TestKhan data on Javed Burki is all referenceable and therefore you are exceeding your authority by deleting it and by Blocking TestKhan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2010khan (talk • contribs) 19:23, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Morning, sock YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:35, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Javed Burki sock[edit]

See here. It would be great when you are blocking users if you could (1) place an appropriate block template on the user's talk page, and (2) use a slightly less cryptic edit summary. I believe I figured it out, but it would be best to ask an uninvolved admin to do the blocking (in my opinion), since you were the one in an edit conflict with the user. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:30, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 June 2010[edit]


ITN/C[edit]

Please retract your comments about Mwalcoff on WP:ITN/C. Physchim62 (talk) 00:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alcoholism[edit]

Could you semi-protect alcoholism? It was semi-protected once. Now we're back to where we were: 80% or more of the edits are vandalism or reverting it. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 13:51, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 03:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Nunquam Dormio (talk) 07:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Navweaps.com[edit]

You started this. Got an opinion? [1]--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:19, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Intensional vandalism on Test cricket why?[edit]

Test cricket: how the game is played and knowledge[edit]

I reverted your recent edit because i believe you do not know anything about cricket and how the game is played. Please do your proper education in cricket before talking because you do not know what your talking about. I know the rules and laws of cricket and how its played. Please do not add non-sense, un-educational issues or trying to gain attention by intensionally reverting it without knowlege. I improved this article until you decided to stuff it up when your own point of views, without using proper knowledge. Thanks! --Uqahr talk 04:17 3 June, 2010 (UTC)

Because your edits introduced wrong grammar all over the place and has made wrong generalisations, eg that only pacers take the new ball, all matches start at 11am, all matches are hosted by a home team, and lots more. Your English is not as good as you think it to be. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:54, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that you calm down, cease calling everyone else here "vandals" and before making sweeping statements about others' lack of knowledge actually take a look at the contributions that others have made to the WP:Cricket, cricket WikiProject. How about discussing at Talk:Test cricket the problems you see with the article, your suggested changes and we can see if we can reach some sort of consensus about the best way to go forward. The hostile manner that you have used here is generally counter-productive when trying to make improvements in the encyclopedia. -- Mattinbgn\talk 04:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reply: To user Yellowmonkey: What did you say about my English? This is racial discrimination; even your wikipedia user name is insulting? Where is you respect for others? --Uqahr talk 05:03, 3 June (UTC)
I'm going to agree with YellowMonkey here, that seems like a pretty sweeping change you've made, Uqahr, with several grammatical errors in it. If you want to make changes, I'd recommend you make them a little bit at the time so other editors can weigh in on the changes, and if the addition is correct, help you with the proper grammar. Good luck! Dayewalker (talk) 05:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Accusations of racial discrimination should not be bandied around so lightly. Try and assume good faith when dealing with other editors. -- Mattinbgn\talk 05:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will not interfer with you again. Next time learn how to respect other people; alright!! do you understand? good luck too! Thanks! --Uqahr (talk) 05:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Nash[edit]

Hmm.... seems a bit POVish with the descriptions of Dyer and Coventry. What's with the journo style paras that don't really connect with each other? And "Inch for inch, pound for pound, the greatest player in the history of Australian Rules" does not mean that Dyer thinks that Nash is the "greatest player in the history of Australian rules football." Aaroncrick TALK 06:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've piped up on PR, I think you should do the same as well, since you are more up to speed with AR than I am. And yes, I think the Wallish book veers into fandom from a brief read of it. Also ignores his deliberate throw among other things. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 03:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did but the page changed and I lost it all and couldn't be bothered doing it all again. Might again later? Aaroncrick TALK 06:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's annoying when that happens. I always try to remember to Control C before I shift screens when I write something a paragraph long YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 06:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you unprotect Ponting? Aaroncrick TALK 03:26, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did, but I don't know what he point is YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 06:39, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Khỉ vàng...[edit]

Is the picture currently in your userpage a joke or did someone compromise your secondary account? I feel very surprised.--AM (talk) 14:45, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's really me. It's not an endorsement of communism, quite the opposite I thought YellowMonkey (bananabucket!) 01:15, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. My first assumption, when I saw this photo, is that someone blackmailed you ^^.--AM (talk) 12:55, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


About Medium pace bowling redirect[edit]

Hi YM,
In this edit [[Medium pace bowling]] was redirected to Fast bowling. MDCollins and I have discussed this. We've voted 1 to zero to refer this to you for an expert opinion, before going to WT:CRIC. It would appear to me that Medium pace is a separate disciple to Fast bowling and quite possibly deserves a stand-alone article. While there may be also be a cogent argument to be made that it may simply only rate an entry in Glossary of cricket terms#M, as mentioned, I would... JT's over for a try, with the kick come! Can't talk now.
--Shirt58 (talk) 10:36, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, when will NSW ever win again. Maybe not for a few more years. And I'm not special. I think there isn't much difference except the speed really. They get less bounce but that's because there's less energy on the ball. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:06, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Len Hutton[edit]

It's another long job! Getting there slowly but lots more to do. It will be far too long but I'm going to fork quite a bit. Why would your Hutton/Compton article have caused such a fuss? I'm hoping to have a look at some bodyline stuff in the next few weeks; just got hold of the Larwood biography too. And I hope to put Jardine up for FAC any day now, just having a last look at it. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:28, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caused a big stink once... it even made the Wikipedia newspaper and there was a big deletion campaign Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-09-07/Discussion_report and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Loxton with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948. I had reused the bits from the main articles on the Tests and had prepared something on Hutton/Compton/Yardley/Washbrook/Bedser/Laker. I think I did it for everyone who did two-three or more Tests but haven't taken any steps towards publishing so to speak. I guess with the complaints mainly about dudes who played only 1 or no Tests eg Hamence in 1948, I could escape censure, but there you are. I'll do another run-through of dear Dougie... lol YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:06, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good old Dougie is at FAC now. I'm almost at 1948 for Hutton if you have anything juicy. I've got Fingleton for this series, as well as Hutton's biography and the other usual stuff. When I've finished, I'll probably have an article on pre-war Hutton, but if there's enough for specific 1946-47 or 1948 articles, I'll do that or add to it or whatever. Saw the deletion thing; seems a bit odd in my view as they are substantial articles and not sure why anyone would want to delete them. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:19, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll upload the Hutton in 1948 then. If the parent was 4-5 paras and had a daughter 10X longer there would be an uproar about machine-like article writing YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 03:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More Jardine...[edit]

I don't know if you've noticed Brian's comments on sourcing (which seem a bit harsher than his comments on other FACs, but no matter). I'm sure most of the books he mentions would be very good, but I've not got any of them, and have no way of getting them either. I can add some other sources (e.g. the Larwood bio, the Fingleton bio which you copied for me a while back) but I suspect that neither of these things are quite what he is after. Also, the Warner or Bradman stuff he mentions is referenced in either the Douglas or Frith book, so I'm a little stumped. He mentioned something similar on Rhodes ages ago. Do you have any suggestions? --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't read it because I thought it was just the routine stuff. I'll send you more scans from the Fingo book. There is stuff about him meeting up with Fingo later. I can get bits from Cricket Crisis and other stuff. In general, BB is one of the 2-3 strictest guys on Wiki, and he knows about cricket. If you look at the other sports' stuff on FAC, many of them are 15k prose (and yours are 50+k prose) on comparable long-serving players in mainstream, well-documented ball sports. I started commenting on them recently but probably should have done so for 4 years. Most of the other projects just lift stuff off the internet, which is usually crap anyway. In general, the cricket FAs usually far outstrip the other sports in terms of research. Even one book is already above average.... I don't think a Surrey CCC thing would be much use but they aren't in Aus anway. The VCA and NSWCA books only have 10 pages on the most important guys at most. Farewell to Cricket was mostly a giant argument with Fingo. I can dig out some snippets from Tiger and McCabe (both by Jack McHarg) about Jardine. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You mean you already have the Duncan Hamilton book? Do you hve Le Quesne, Warner's autobiog or Fingo's autobiog? I can give you the needed snippets YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, you should do a 1948-style bunch of stuff for Bodyline. You seem to be up to speed with all the literature. Just had a glance through some books and every single thing Jardine did was microanalysed for political implications. Jardine 32-33 could just be, well, endless... and the articles for the Tests, leak, cable.... there's more on those cables than Cable 243 in scholarly political textbooks. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 07:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've got the Duncan Hamilton book which I'm going to use a bit, but most of the bodyline stuff is rehashed anyway. It'll make for a very good Larwood article at some point soon! Don't have any of the others at the moment, so I'd appreciate anything on Jardine. Does Bradman say anything in Farewell to Cricket? I agree about the County History, I've used the Yorkshire official history and it's a bit sparse on the big players (but good on the minor ones). Also, any snippets from Tiger and McCabe appreciated. No-one else seems that interested in the review yet, so if BB has such objections, it doesn't bode too well! --Sarastro1 (talk) 09:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll email them to you. The package has Cricket Crisis by Fingo, Long Innings by Plum, the biogs of Tiger and McCabe by McHarg, LeQuesne listed in the Bodyline article is the one without a titel tag on the page, "Bodyline Umpire" is the other untitled one with mentions of Umpire Hele by Whitington. Do you have "In Quest of the Ashes"? I glanced through and seems to have little that Frith wouldn't (twice as long and small writing) and I doubt Jardine would psychoanlayse himself; mostly match reports and ball-by-ball stuff but I can scan if needed. There also official biogs of Braddles by Roland Perry, but these are hagiographies and wouldn't add much (See Perry's article. Bradman only allowed hagiographers the privilege of meeting him). For LeQuesne I have only taken the political parts and analysis of Jardine'c character, not the play by play stuff. As for the duplication stuff, you might as well chuck in alternative cites even if they only copy each other to saw that they agree with each other, so that it at least proves that you aren't cherry-picking YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've got Quest for the Ashes, but as you say, nothing in it that's not in Frith or just a bit of petty moaning. Thanks for the other stuff, I'll see what I can use, hopefully later today. Should at least give another view than Christopher Douglas, as you say. --Sarastro1 (talk) 08:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Added some of the stuff you sent, especially from Fingo. A lot of the other stuff seems to be general bodyline, and not too specific to Jardine. (I see Bradman amusingly manages to barely mention him!) I don't want to put too much of it in as I don't want the article to be just bodyline, as I said before. However, I'm not finished yet and will do more over the next day or two. Could you check the book refs I've put in for the publishing info, as I've had to assume the publishing date and publisher for the stuff I've used so far. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:53, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Put in as much as I thought was relevant without being trivial. Not sure it all fits in smoothly though, would appreciate it if you could take a look. Don't want it to get too long, as people get very sniffy about long articles. Do you think there is anything else essential that should go in?--Sarastro1 (talk) 20:47, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I'll start ce-ing. Is there anything in Frith that talks about Jardine causing republicanism or anti-Empire tendencies? The other thing I would do is to simply duplicate the ref, ie to show that Frith or Le Quesne also agreed on a certain point, just to illustrate that Douglas is not alone or anything. I did that in Keith Miller (the books all copied off each other including errors)Maybe you should give some of the others a personal nag to review the article. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 03:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

Good to see you as active as usual. Just read through Brooks, interesting article actually — surprised by the lack of customers. As for the the cricket lists, for Bellerive Oval I'll indulge info on the partnerships as not much cricket has been played and I know about them all. Aaroncrick TALK 01:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you ever hear him on the TV. I cna't say I am surprised, as the Swimming WP is dead and none of the regulars like to review sport... But this altercation with Newman must've been pretty funny. Moondyne did meet this guy when he was in the prime of his career, see his userpage. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 03:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, must have been a bit of a character, however. I'm guessing you probably didn't hear him on TV. Oh wow, that would have been a while ago then. Aaroncrick TALK 03:23, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did, although I cna't remember anything of his style YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 07:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've added comments from the top half. That's enough for now, though. Should come back later. Aaroncrick TALK 11:26, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have all the content issues been resolved with Jardine? I'll probably skim; however, I doubt I'll the time to take a proper look at the prose. Aaroncrick TALK 22:43, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Content is fine. Stuff the prose...lol YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 07:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Lol; tempted to just give support considering you and BB have gone through; however... Aaroncrick TALK 08:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's what the other Wikiprojects do. Auto pile-ons. It's just not cricket! You should see the other sports' FAs and see how stubby they are. Not comprehensive YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know, especially a few years back before my time. Noticed you've been commenting on most of the stubby FACs. Aaroncrick TALK 04:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rokkala (Coramandel23)[edit]

Hey YM. Would you mind taking a look at this IP, 75.134.157.143 (talk · contribs) if it has any relation to Rokkala/Coramandel23 (he got a rename)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elockid (talk • contribs) 0:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

It was inconclusive. Rokkala shows up in two different states, so while 75 is in another one as well, I wouldn't rule it out YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 07:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Elockid (Talk) 13:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I shoulda waited till you finished voting, lol YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 02:14, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Bugger[edit]

Xtzou (talk · contribs) has been blocked as a sock of Mattisse (talk · contribs) which is a real bugger considering I though Xtzou was the best GAN reviewer we had. I've briefly skimmed over her problems before, but surely blocking her will have a net negative for the project IMHO. Aaroncrick TALK 07:31, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mattisse spoke out against a lot of the warlords of Wikipedia, so she doesn't stand a chance. Even if she reincarnates and quietly sits away writing and copyediting and not commenting on politics, they would just raid her IP to keep jumping on her. Some of her opponents used socks and nothing happened to them as far as blocks were concerned. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I've now added my support. Aaroncrick TALK 09:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nelson Mandela has glaring bits missing, but I wouldn't be surprised if it stays a GA. Aaroncrick TALK 01:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've bitten YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, i was going to initiate a GAR myself, but a newbie already had. However, I can't see much being improved. Aaroncrick TALK 01:50, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, YellowMonkey. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties of India/archive1.
Message added SBC-YPR (talk) 16:23, 11 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Flag issues of Ireland and Windies[edit]

Heyy, just take this matter into consideration. This is a part of 2011 Cricket World Cup discussions.

The flag included for Ireland in the tables is inaccurate and inappropriate. Ireland field a 'cross-border team- representing both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland (which is part of the UK) - there is, I believe an accepted flag flown at all ireland matches of three green shamrocks on a dark blue blackground - this would be the appropriate flag to include. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.133.110 (talk) 23:41, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I too feel this is correct. We should not consider using IRELAND cricket flag and West Indies Cricket Flag as inappropriate. Just see in Rugby Union. The flag of Ireland Rugby Union (not the logo) is used for their national team in tags like

--Karyasuman (talk) 04:20, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this was already the convention to use the blue-green shamrock not the RoI flag YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:35, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...[edit]

Interesting: should get it — wonder how it will go? Also, I don't like your userpage anymore! lol Aaroncrick TALK 10:58, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I better read up on the new thing. The political userpage is more amusing! YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:35, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Some can only speak English :) I'm not sure it's going to work, however. Aaroncrick TALK 05:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I never expected it to. More for amusement, really YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 02:14, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you transcluded Evans? Aaroncrick TALK 03:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did just now after Karanacs passed Brooks YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I was wondering why I couldn't find it. Never heard of the bloke. Aaroncrick TALK 04:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neither does much of the literature YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:27, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Load of crap, but I guess it's an easy way to get a symbol. I don't see why you would want to do something half-hearted, it's more interesting to do something properely, I think, anyway. Aaroncrick TALK 05:37, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ever noticed that the micro-GA/FAs (minor cyclones, highways, sports and probably most of the pop song articles) are usually done by North Americans? YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 06:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seen the CA Ashes ad? Appears rather good to me. Aaroncrick TALK 05:54, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No I hadn't actually YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 06:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SarekOfVulcan (talk · contribs) appears to be another power tripping admin, as he indef blocked Tony1 for goodness sake! Aaroncrick TALK 01:23, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. A bit of name recognition boost YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:16, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Names of Ho Chi Minh City[edit]

Hi there—I screwed up on moving Names of Ho Chi Minh City into article space, and it's currently listed for speedy deletion. Mind giving it a delete so I can recreate it using a proper pagemove? Thanks. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 19:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 02:14, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 02:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits to Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/June 17[edit]

Again, it would help all other admins (including me) if you also actually tagged or edited the actual bolded article instead of unilaterally removing it. If you don't even bother to help and add any cleanup or "orange-to-red" article issue tags to address your concerns on that bolded page, it really does NOT guarantee that another admin will add it later in the day to re-balance the Main Page – because he or she might look at the current state of that page, see that there are no tags there, and then assume that the hidden comment you added to the OTD template is outdated. Furthermore, the current state of that page will never get addressed, and it may wind up being posted again next year – possibly at the expense of one you DO want visible. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for tagging the O. J. Simpson murder case article.
However, the main O. J. Simpson article still remains a B-class article, without any of those tags. Therefore, there is still a chance this event could be restored on OTD, with that being the alternate bolded article, similar to what was listed four years ago.[2] Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 16:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:YellowMonkey/Archive174&oldid=1140656421"