User talk:GoodDay

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jack forbes (renamed) (talk | contribs) at 19:47, 11 October 2008 (→‎Jimbo Wales: c). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

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

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 place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Hello to all fellow Wikipedians. Be assured I'll be as curtious as possible & hope to provide worthy answers to your questions (about wiki edits), I'm looking forward to meeting you. User:GoodDay 22:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC). [reply]

Archiving

The bot said it was archiving, but while it was removing threads, it wasn't pasting them where expected. I have put the threads where they belong, and I'll keep an eye on it as it archive in future. -Rrius (talk) 14:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm relatively certain it was my fault, so sorry. -Rrius (talk) 14:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Republcan

Hello again GoodDay, have you ever thought of starting a republican movement in Canada? Is there one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack forbes (talk • contribs) 23:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It makes you wonder why they have one when most people don't know about it. Can I ask you a question? Can you understand how I feel about Scotland being Independent? Jack forbes (talk) 23:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, GoodDay, if only you knew. Longshanks and the rest of Scottish history is only part of it. We in Scotland have been made to feel inferior for hundredes of years. Our own language has been demoted to being just called Gaelic, while the Scottish dialect of English has been called by people who don't know any better Scots. I talk with a Scots dialect, but it's bloody English I talk. There is a wikipedia article here calling this dialect a language and it's a disgrace. I have said so, but do they listen? of course not! Jack forbes (talk) 23:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And who told you that! I'll tell you what GoodDay, if you or I are here within the next ten years and I'm right you send me a check for a thousand pounds. I'm telling you, you will lose your money! Jack forbes (talk) 23:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've no idea, but go on, send the money now :) Jack forbes (talk) 23:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC

Good man! I've always liked you GoodDay, you always see reason. Jack forbes (talk) 00:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't take it off you anyway. Jack forbes (talk) 00:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your right! I have faith in my own people to do the right thing. And if they don't? I will still fight for it as I do now. Jack forbes (talk) 00:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope so, because I would fight in the same circumstances. I shoud have been born in those days, that's how strong I feel. Jack forbes (talk) 00:21, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chat between Jack & Cam

Charming! Feel free to lop off my head to reach your political ends...--Cameron* 16:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just like to make it clear, I do not endorse lopping anyones head off, different days, different way of doing things. Jack forbes (talk) 16:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I endorse any peaceful means of doing so ;). After all, the SNP wish to keep on our gracious queen! :) Btw, Cam = Camilla! --Cameron* 08:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I never said the SNP were perfect ;). Jack forbes (talk) 11:56, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Giano's page

GoodDay, I know you are trying to be sociable there. However, you must be aware that Giano is under a civility sanction right now. He's trying to edit content, and his orange bar keeps popping up. I am sure you aren't doing this to be annoying, just pleasant, but perhaps this is a good time to leave him be without attempting to engage him in conversation. This isn't a criticism, just a word to help you understand that sometimes good intentions have unintended effects. Best, Risker (talk) 23:05, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editors

Hiya.. for what it's worth, I'm with you on that for the most part. I think major positive contributions to mainspace are worth taking into account only when discussing the content of edits; it's not an excuse for getting away with behaviour that would get anyone else smacked down. Prince of Canada t | c 01:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CBC

I should hope not, we can't have all that smut on our tv screens. Seriously, I have heard they are quite conservative. Jack forbes (talk) 17:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we had someone like that, Mary Whitehouse, except she was for real. In fact, they look uncannily alike! Jack forbes (talk) 17:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me, or are you also having trouble getting your watchlist up? Jack forbes (talk) 16:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again, my computers going bonkers! Can't log in now and everything is going in slow motion. I'm off for a lie down. :)-Jack forbes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.198.73 (talk) 17:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Just think, if I can never log in again I will have to use an ip and never be trusted again. :) -Jack forbes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.198.73 (talk) 17:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still having problems but have managed to log on. I think I'll leave it for tonight and see how it is tommorrow. Cheers GoodDay! Jack forbes (talk) 17:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All sorted now. It appears it was not just me with the problem. Jack forbes (talk) 19:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NHL

Hi GoodDay,

Please excuse my ignorance as I am new to the nhl. Just wanted to pick your brains over nhl games. What is the decision in a match? I have noticed many game logs with a decision. Please help! Thanks.

WP:AE

WP:AE Your comments are requested at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement#Enough_is_enough.--Tznkai (talk) 14:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

still around

I'm still around. I just rarely post, mostly read. I see you are still around ;) have a goodday Masterhatch (talk) 22:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"British Isles"

Well, there could be a very good reason for that, GoodDay.:-) I hope that you and Matthew are immeasurably better now that I have finally got a nomme de guerre. In the meantime, 'Bloody hell GD', I hope you shall avoid any future 'silly last comment' situations and endure the wrath of the aforementioned. As you now know, defenders of the Realm here on wikipedia must be disciplined and organised. I only got a nick because it would impress the eternally feisty Sorcha, the Maud Gonne of modern Ireland who 'hurls the little streets upon the great' here on a quotidian basis. Dunlavin Green (talk) 15:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SPA

I think you are being accused of being a SPA on Joe Biden's talk page (hair). 903M (talk) 05:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Senators alternate captains

I removed Heatley, then went looking. The Ottawa Citizen is reporting that he's been named alternate captain, so I'm accepting their report as valid. Only after reading that article have I re-added Heatley as an alternate captain. (Plus, I spelled his name right.) —C.Fred (talk) 23:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rideau

Ha! I pray not in my lifetime. Besides, Rideau isn't really all that impressive. It just looks sort of drab and awful from the outside. Casa Loma in Toronto would make a far better Executive residence. Prince of Canada t | c 16:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nor my lifetime! Surely presidents don't like pomp and ceremony? They're boring, expensive to keep up and efficient... ;) --Cameron* 16:14, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If I remember correctly the White House is one of the smallest presidential residences in the world. In the words of Tom Baker 'White House? Personally I find white a bit boring, why not freshen it up with a touch of cream?' ;) --Cameron* 16:24, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commonwealth realm wars

Cam? Since when is my name Camilla? ;) Personally I'm sick of the feuding. It's just not necessary...--Cameron* 20:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's only 2 letters off the full name. Off wiki, both Cami and Cams are used. I really don't mind though, as long as it's polite! :) --Cameron* 20:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obama Talk Page Comments

I was a little taken aback by Wikidemon's criticism of me on the Obama talk page. Did what I say there offend you? If so, I'm sorry...I meant my preface as an acknowledgment that the article is the subject of many attacks, but that even though my question may seem like one, it wasn't.LedRush (talk) 21:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like I am being bullied on the page. If you didn't take offense by my statements (as you said on my talk page), could you also say so there? I just want the "side discussion" to end.LedRush (talk) 22:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Germain Doucet

Ay! I haven't seen you round much so thought I'd spy on your main page - found Germain Doucet from there! It must be quite something to have traced your ancestry so far back and to a notable person; my family tree invariably consists of cotton spinners and farmers. :s --Jza84 |  Talk  23:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, according to my brother (who does all the family tree stuff), I'm descended of a Royalist captain who fought at the Storming of Bolton. Doesn't appear in WP mind, so I'm suspicious of his research! I'm proud of the poor simple folk up my tree mind. For some reason, I see them like the characters in a L. S. Lowry painting. --Jza84 |  Talk  23:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure - 2,500 hits on Google for Germain Doucet and 40 hits when adding "Sieur de la Verdure". Might make a good DKY? if it was expanded. --Jza84 |  Talk  23:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prefer to be helpful IP or sarcastic disruptive user?

Hi. You'd like people to register. It's policy that they don't have to. Would you please stop it with the sarcastic, cryptic, unhelpful throwaway remarks and try to contribute? Please. 83.34.245.0 (talk) 17:20, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of the reasons that you register is so people can see your distinct history. For example, I know from GoodDay's history that he is a strong contributor to Wikipedia. However, I know no such thing about IP 83.34....LedRush (talk) 17:24, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I advocate mandatory registration for editors, after 1-month on Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 17:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
...and I have no idea whether the person editing as GoodDay today is the same person as GoodDay a week ago. I don't particularly care. Contributions are about verifiable facts. It doesn't matter whether an editor has been on WP a long time. They could have been editing badly for a long time. I care that they make valid points with verifiable sources. 83.34.245.0 (talk) 19:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since accounts are password protected and GoodDays edit history is consistent, I can be pretty damn sure he still the same person. Frankly, that is a silly point. -Rrius (talk) 22:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Register an account, please. GoodDay (talk) 19:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting...Well, for my two bits, I don't believe in mandatory accounts, but on the other hand, having an account establishes familiarity with other users. See, over my many years of editing, i have seen a lot of things, including a lot of sockpuppets. I'd much rather seen an ip address being used than sockpuppets. sockpuppets are deceitful and always have an ulterior movtive (otherwise they wouldn't "hide" under another name). So, yes, if i see an IP address make a change on my watchlist, i scrutinize the edit a little more than if i see an account user, but that doesn't mean all ip address make bad edits all the time. Actually, there are a lot of ip address that make good edits. anyways, that's my two bits. Masterhatch (talk) 20:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifying: My main gripe with IP accounts, is their participation in heated discussions on Wikipedia (like at talk:British Isles & talk:Republic of Ireland). GoodDay (talk) 20:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
yes, you are right...in heated discussions, using an ip address like that is the same as using a sockpuppet. Masterhatch (talk) 20:38, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, I find people who use IPs in heated discussions and quite obviously based on their comments ans knowledge have actual accounts to be no better than sock puppets. -Djsasso (talk) 20:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, but it remains the case that you don't need to register to edit Wikipedia, and a good thing too. Just think, if registration was mandatory 100% of all vandalism would be perpetrated by registered users; how terrible would that be? MidnightBlue (Talk) 20:52, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It would actually be good, because then you could track and block/ban them easier instead of having to try and follow the chain from IP to IP. -Djsasso (talk) 20:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, in response to IP's choice of section header? I'd prefer helpful registered users. GoodDay (talk) 21:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(conflict)::::It would actually be good, because then you could track and block/ban them easier instead of having to try and follow the chain from IP to IP. -Djsasso (talk) 20:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But you'd have very many more sock puppets. Probably as broad as it's long. Granted, forcing registration could reduce overall vandalism; it's just too easy not to log on and immediately vandalise an article, but you'd have a great deal fewer editors overall, and therefore fewer edits. I think that's one of the main reasons for allowing IP editing. Apparently going for quantity rather than initial quality works to the benefit of a Wiki, so I'm told. MidnightBlue (Talk) 21:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
IPs who refuse to sign-in, create suspicion. GoodDay (talk) 21:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And registered users whose only contributions are throwaway remarks create frustration. 83.34.245.0 (talk) 00:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If IP is frustrated? create an account & sign-in. GoodDay (talk) 17:35, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok guys, enough is enough on both sides. -Djsasso (talk) 17:37, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. GoodDay (talk) 17:38, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wales

  • Yes, granted; Wales is the only one (in the British Isle at least), but it does have them. Wales hasn't been a "country" since its conquest like, 800 years ago. Just like Northern Ireland isn't a country, it's just called such for laymens. Jasca Ducato (talk) 22:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, I mean England. Wales was conquered by England, and became aprt of England following it conquest, becoming a principality in the process. Jasca Ducato (talk) 10:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ip's

Just being honest here GoodDay, I think continually asking ip's to register won't work, it may even make them more determined not to. Is there somewhere this can be brought up for discussion by the community? Jack forbes (talk) 22:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:AN case

How so? All !voters have opposed all options so far! I think a joint RFC would be better though Prince has stated he would not cooperate. PS: It's an AN case not ANI. ;) --Cameron* 13:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Btw, your "buddy" knows what to do again in order for me to personally push this up to ArbCom (as noted here in the green box when responding to G2's comment which is above in the grey box), although I hope that things will not have to turn ugly (as you've accurately put it). Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:49, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • RFCs are indeed optional, but they're recommended as they offer a final chance to users who have displayed problematic conduct. However, if after an RFC and prior restrictions, the user continues engaging in problematic conduct, then such users are rarely ever even slightly pleased with what will happen next. Of course, the same goes for ArbCom cases because they never hand out barnstars or wiki-medals. ;) Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Just to clarify; the second part of my first sentence beginning with "as they offer a final chance to users..." referred specifically to user conduct RFCs of course, but the part before it applies to both article RFCs and user conduct RFCs. Yeah, if an article RFC fails, you can try mediation - but, all users need to be willing to be subject to mediation. If they're not, the case is rejected. Yes, ArbCom won't take on content disputes, but they will handle user conduct. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:16, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About comment at WQA

Meditation Committee or Meditation Cabal - both are similar but slightly different. ;) But jokes aside, it's a good suggestion if they can't talk to each other on their own. Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(warning, essay alert)GoodDay, don't get me wrong or take the comment I left on WQA the wrong way, I know you like to comment and you're very aware of all the minutae at this stage. But it would be very easy to turn the WQA into a content dispute and we'd all be dragged back into the never-ending discussion about rights and wrongs. The WQA is solely to address Tharky's behaviour. I invite you to look at my behaviour, leaving aside the content. I edit articles, I provide references, I open discussions on talk pages, I ask for references. I conduct myself civilly and politely, I never make personal comments. I don't have a political agenda - indeed I don't believe I've ever editted an article with a political POV, and I really don't have any strong views. I'm not antiBritish - I'm not anti-anything really. But I'm pro-accuracy and pro-fairness and pro-correctness. If other editors object to my editting, they can simply follow correct protocol and procedure. They can provide references to back up claims, they can discuss the edits with me on the Talk page, etc. I don't ignore them, and I'll engage with them. After that, look at Tharky's behavior, especially regarding his reversions of my edits, his personal comments in edit summaries, his ignoring of requests for discussions, etc. This is what the WQA is about. Nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with content. --HighKing (talk) 16:00, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For a good example of HK's tactics when one engages him in discussion, see Talk:Alexander Thom. No amount of references were good enough for him, and he still continued to revert. ðarkuncoll 16:05, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jimbo Wales

Hi. GoodDay, I've asked Jimbo Wales about the ip problem and am waiting for a reply. Keep an eye out for his page and see what he says.Jack forbes (talk) 01:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, but there are plenty of admins looking at that page and I'm sure some of them can answer the question. Jack forbes (talk) 01:32, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's now being discussed on jimbos page! Jack forbes (talk) 01:37, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should put a word in on jimbos page, just to back me up. Jack forbes (talk) 01:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks as though the issue has been done to death. I'm going to leave it alone, I get the feeling I would be wasting my time. Jack forbes (talk) 19:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Buddy

Which buddy comment? I get the feeling I'm missing something! --Cameron* 18:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, you like Jimbo Wales even though he himself claimed to be like the Queen of the United Kingdom, a constitutional monarch. Closet monarchist! ;p --Cameron* 19:00, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to your defence of him actually. What's the difference between writing to Elizabeth and Jimbo? Elizabeth answers her mail! ;) --Cameron* 19:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GoodDay&oldid=244628361"