User talk:Mike33

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 sources in Homosexuality in the Roman Catholic priesthood 2 Nico Ditch 3 "Good faith edit" 4 Non-conformity in Manchester 1560 - 1690 5 User talk:Essjay

[edit] sources in Homosexuality in the Roman Catholic priesthood

Hi there. I noticed that this edit of yours to Homosexuality in the Roman Catholic priesthood added two important quotations from Dr Elizabeth Stuart in Roman Catholics and Homosexuality' quoted by Kate Saunders in Catholics and Sex and Kate Saunders in Catholics and Sex. Thankyou for providing a source, because the article needs them, as do many articles.

Would you be able to add the page numbers of these quotes to the references? This would help to give clarity to the article and i suppose even lead to others providing sourced material, considering it is currently an article with WP:NPOV, WP:CU and WP:V tags that call us to action. If you could help in this way, i'm sure even more Reliable Sources will begin to be cited.

Cheers and happy editing! Jpe|ob

Are you able to do it? Cheers in advance, Jpe|ob 03:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I just replied on my talk page. Cheers, Jpe|ob 11:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nico Ditch

Nice work on the Nico Ditch, we've needed an article for a while now. I phoned a man at the University yesterday about the ditch. It seems they did some work on the ditch in the Reddish area a few years ago and wrote a report. I'm hoping to see him in the next couple of weeks. The ditch is also mentioned in couple of books about the history of Tameside, I think they are by Michael Nevell, one or more of "Tameside before 1066", "Tameside 1066-1700", and "Tameside 1700-1930". One of them reviews the theories about the ditch's purpose, and my memory is that he decides it was probably a boundary marker. Farrer and Brownbill rather dismiss the idea that a battle near the ditch has named Gorton & Reddish: "Out of Gore-ton and Red-ditch, with the help of the intervening Nico Ditch, popular fancy has made the story of a great battle in the neighbourhood; Harland and Wilkinson, Traditions of Lancs. 26" (online). There also appears to be something in "Vol. xxiii. of Lancashire and Cheshire Antiquarian Society" see here. Anyway, great stuff! Regards, Mr Stephen 10:39, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Good faith edit"

Yeah, I hit the wrong button on the browser, and it was too late. I'm still trying to figure out all these new anti-vandal functions I had added to my monobook.js file. Besides, I'm not very familiar with soccer; but I did have the whit to figure out that the deletion of categories was bad (and FC Barcelona probably shouldn't be in Copa Latina). -Patstuart 17:04, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Non-conformity in Manchester 1560 - 1690

Bit out of my line, I'm afraid. That even pre-dates the Cross Street chapel. Regards, Mr Stephen 17:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Essjay

Please don't post editor's messages (information hidden in <!-- -->) on talk pages when the information you are posting is actually post worthy and is not some kind of reminder notice such as "do not post above this line". I am, as pointed out by the title of this post, referring to your contribution to User talk:Essjay (seen here). In reference to your post, I would like to inform you that all of tools.wikimedia.de is not working (so the link I have posted will probably not work). Cbrown1023 22:31, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, when you wrote the comment there was a redirection to a verstion that WASN'T WORKING (to mirror your format).

Some comments:

1. Editor's messages are used in articles because that is where things are edited. When you post an editor's message to a talk page the average editors, especially ones who use the + sign to add discussions, will not see it. This is especially important because when Essjay's edit counter was not working, then there were many posts on his page and there would have been many more if the users posted them as editor's messages.
2. It also would not be petty to mention something of importance on a "very hard working wikipedia editor's discussion page" for the same reason that it is not to post anything else. Especially since the user in question is taking an indefinate wikibreak (but has not "abandoned" the site).
3. How can another user use your watchlist and why would they want to? I'm assuming that you did not mean to say that and actually meant to say your edit summary.
4. I did not assume the worst by posting that message, I just informed you that editor's messages are not supposed to be used for talk pages and talked about what I was referring to.

You seem to be the one giving bad faith by yelling at me about posting a constructive comment on your talk page and my "bad manners" that disgust you, but I, being a user who uses good faith, do not think you are meaning to show "bad faith". It also seems that you are the one not checking your wikipedia facts or facts about the history of Essjay's page. I do hope you can dispute whatever I just stated as incorrect so that I may adjust my edits to show more good faith. Cbrown1023 02:45, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I thought it was just something like that, I really didn't think that you were like that all the time (and am glad that I now know that you aren't) because you seemed a little more upset than I would have thought. I am also sorry for beating that argument to the death with my long response, I get a little carried away with illustrating my point (a flaw for me sometimes...). I'm glad we could solve this peacefully and move on. I look forward to an opportunity to work with you in the future. Cbrown1023 13:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

lol... thanks for the explanation. Cbrown1023 14:07, 22 October 2006 (UTC)