User talk:Vintagekits

This is a Rockpocket and troll-free zone.

This editor has full permission to remove, without replying, any comments he feels are likely to inflame dispute. If you have a problem with this editor, you are invited to bring that concern to the attention of User:SirFozzie or another member of the administrator community, but please bear in mind that we have a zero-tolerance approach to harassment. Constructive dialogue is always welcome, but if your message is removed it is safe to assume that User:Vintagekits has read it and chooses not to debate with you at this time.

Archives
Archive 1 - 5 August 2006 to 25 January 2007 Archive 2 - 25 January 2007 - 5 February 2007 Archive 3 - 5 February 2007 - 8 March 2007 Archive 4 - 9 March - 14 May 2007 Archive 5 - 14 May - 7 July 2007 Archive 6 - 7 July - 16 August 2007 Archive 7 - 16 August - 12 October 2007

Comments from unregistered users may be deleted, however comments from Rockpocket will be deleted immediately, unread and I will not stop until his bitter campaign is halted and he is stripped of his admin powers.

In case you missed them...

Angelo Fusco, Joe Doherty and Laurence McKeown. Pat McGeown should hopefully be bluelinked much later today as well.... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 10:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Excellent work. When are you doing Pat?--Vintagekits 10:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

About half way through his article, should be done later today. I've already found a handy image for it on FlickR. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 10:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

• Cracking work I have to say. Need a hand?--Vintagekits 10:33, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll be all right I reckon, thanks for the offer. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 10:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Look at that bluelink! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

What about his name in gay lick?--Vintagekits 22:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

If I knew it, I'd add it.... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:19, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Ally will tell ya I'd say - Padraig Mac an Ghabhan. --Vintagekits 23:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Correct, though with a fada! Pádraig Mac an Ghabhann - Alison ^❤ 06:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Jackie McMullan as well, and a few more articles on the way time permitting.... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 09:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Please don't make nasty comments while editing. That ip traces to London anyway. Fred Bauder 16:26, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

My traceroute showed that it went through Embra. Not the first this month either - anyway point taken. regards.--Vintagekits 18:48, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Michael Gomez

Looking at the history of the editor concerned I am asuming this was vandalism. I assume no one will mind if you confirm my edit here was correct [1]. Giano 19:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, Gomez was born in 1977.--Vintagekits 19:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

1977 it is then. Giano 19:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

21st of June 1977 that is!--Vintagekits 20:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Done! Giano 20:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

• Are these anon edits all correct [2] - I see it nows says "was a boxer" is that correct? Giano 16:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• That's a sockpuppet of a banned editor anyway, so I've reverted the edits. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I knew that 216 was our mate Robert.--Vintagekits 00:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Gomez Images

Do you own the copyright to the Gomez images VK? I notice they're from his official website and seem to have been taken by a photographer from http://www.britishboxing.net/, who presumably owns the copyright? Apologies if I'm missing something. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 08:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The images were given to me by the photographer who works with the site. I should probably get some more that arnt actually on the website to prove it.--Vintagekits 17:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Vk, you need to follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Copyright issues#Copyright owners who submitted their own work to Wikipedia. Those photographs are published under copyright on Gomez's page, so if they are not released by someone from that page they will be deleted from here as a copyvio. Rockpocket 17:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Stay off my page Rocket. If an admin (except you) wants me to forward them the email where the owner of the phots gives me that picture then I would be happy to provide that.--Vintagekits 17:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure he'll have actually released the copyright to you? Or is it the case that he has given you permission to use them on Wikipedia? If so, the copyright tag you have used is incorrect. Email him, using one of the examples at Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. Then follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission, there's a specific email address his reply has to go to. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 18:54, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

VK - forward them on to me if you like as I have access to OTRS permissions queue and can get it sorted for you - Alison ^❤ 19:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll do it now.--Vintagekits 19:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Orthodox?

Ah, now you're asking. I think, like you said, the Orthodox stance article is the better of the two, and we only need one article.

Brain Rodeo has a point that there's likely more can be said about karate and what have you, but it seems like it might as well be all in one place, which means Orthodox stance again. Only if it got too big would there be a reason to split it up. If there are sections on different fighting sports, then I think you can make a redirect so that Orthodox (boxing) goes to the "Boxing" section and Orthodox (karate) to the karate section. I made one for the film at Orthodox Stance (film) and if you click on it, it seems to go to the right bit. So, I agree with you that it's better having this all at the one place.

Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Hope you're well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angusmclellan (talk • contribs) 21:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm grand. Thanks for the reply - I really just wanted reassurance that I wasnt being unreasonable and just backing the "stance" article because I created it. Maybe I will post something on the boxing project page with a link to the discussion of the Talk:Orthodox stance page. Maybe you could copy your response here on that discussion also. regards. --Vintagekits 21:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Lifer?

Hiya Vk. How you holding up? How much longer can they keep you in the cage? I must say your restraint is AWESOME. I know I couldn't do it! Very best as always (Sarah777 21:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC))

Get with the programme Sarah!! I've been free for a week! Get it!!--Vintagekits 21:52, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

The champagne don't taste too good no more :( And archive all the evidence please, this page is browser intensive! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Jeez I went through that vast page looking for the release notice!!(Sarah777 22:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC))

here ya go - Rockpocket was fuming over it but hey thats not my problem.--Vintagekits 22:13, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Never spotted it was closed; obviously a watchlist of 2,000 isn't big enough. I like this one "Reversion of edits by anonymous IPs do not count as a revert" - Arbcom. That I can work with as certain strands of opinion are very prone to anonymous IP abuse and I'm not just talking about myself:) They know who they are. (Sarah777 22:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC))

Just for the record, in case you think I'm totally stupid/asleep, some of us have been studiously not noticing certain ... activities ... over the last while. Just so's you know! - Alison ^❤ 00:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Why am I doing something that I should or shouldnt be doing?--Vintagekits 01:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Dunno. Maybe she is talking about me? (Sarah777 01:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC))

Look what I found One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 01:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

It's because the ArbCom hasn't QUITE closed yet, they're still mucking about with the wording for the probation (Yes, there's motions to close but it hasn't formally closed yet).. It's close enough that I can scale back my WP time for the next lil bit. That's what Alison was mentioning, VK, that per the agreement you weren't supposed to be editing elsewhere till it closes.., but I think everyone involved thinks that the ArbCom's been hanging on so long that there's no real harm about enacting your freedom a bit early and not being anal about it. :) SirFozzie 01:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Zackly, Foz. Myself and VK had an agreement re. his unblocking which he'd been very careful to keep until maybe a week or so back. It still stands but he's ignoring it now, which is a pity but there ya go. It's not worth blocking about at this stage & it's not something I'll be doing, though I very much could. He knows where he stands - Alison ^❤ 02:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/The Troubles Closed

Here's a copy of the post I made to AN as the case clerk:

The above named Arbitration case has closed. The Arbitration Committee decided that [a]ny user who hereafter engages in edit-warring or disruptive editing on these or related articles may be placed on Wikipedia:Probation by any uninvolved administrator. This may include any user who was a party to this case, or any other user after a warning has been given. The Committee also decided to uplift Vintagekits' indefinite block at the same time.

Due to the decisions, you are now no longer community banned. Make this chance count. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 08:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, VK! You're officially released :) Now you can go ahead and edit anything you like .... oh, wait! :) - Alison ^❤ 10:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I give him a week, anyone taking bets? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 11:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Aye, cheers!!--Vintagekits 18:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm assuming good faith, so my bets are on Vk staying out of trouble. I'm not so sure that all those covered in the decision will start out of trouble, and this discussion suggests that some folks may not have fully grasped that The Old Ways are no longer acceptable. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I meant to say: good luck Vk. I really do want this to work for you. ---BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I think he's going to be okay and will keep out of trouble. See how things go. I'm certainly not out to block him or anything. However, now that the arb case is over, all the other POV-warriors had better take note of the conditions of probation. And yes, ugh re. that conversation, BHG. It doesn't bode well, does it? - Alison ^❤ 15:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmmm.... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice new word there: athiest presumably means the person most closely associated with Athy. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I have no problems with BC and AD, but some entire cultures do, perhaps they are the "scum" referred to here [3] I don't think VK at his most virulent ever managed to insult a couple of continents in one edit. Giano 21:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Northern Ireland

Setanta, Padraig, VK: I have protected the above article to prevent another edit-war. Given the ArbCom ruling, this really would not be a a good idea. Use the talk page, please. ELIMINATORJR 00:45, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what this has to do with me!--Vintagekits 18:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Freedom....for now!

Vintagekits

4) The indefinite community ban on Vintagekits (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) is lifted and he may edit normally subject to the terms of probation as defined in the enforcement ruling below.

   Passed 5-0 at 08:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC) 

Congrats; don't blow is carelessly - many of us are walking a tightrope to combat insidious POV which unfortunately seems invisible to much of the Anglophone world. All the more reason to be careful, especially in any conduct that could be interpreted as threatening. Take care - and if I get blocked you can visit me and quote my advice back to me! (Sarah777 02:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC))

It's great to check my watch list and see your name popping up. --Domer48 15:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

• Great to see Gomez being improved. You'll be OK. Giano 15:49, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

World Amateur Boxing Championships

I object to your allegation that I made a "weasel insertion" with a good faith edit. I replaced the Northern Ireland flag image on that article, which I presumed editors like you would agree with. I am surpised that you are involved in NI flag related editing so soon after your ban was overturned. Please watch your edit summaries, and please assume good faith. Andrwsc 00:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll make you a deal - I'll watch me edit summaries and you watch your weaseling of the Union Jack into article to represent the occupied six! deal??--Vintagekits 00:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Huh? I'm just trying to make that article consistent. In every case — except for Belfast before my edit — the flag shown was the top-level flag for the sovereign nation. The flag of the Socialist Republic of Serbia was not used for 1978 Belgrade. The flag of Nevada was not used for 1986 Reno. The flag of New South Wales was not used for 1991 Sydney. Why then is it inappropriate for me to change this:

• Belfast, Northern Ireland

to this:

• Belfast, United Kingdom

I don't understand your complaint with my edit. Andrwsc 00:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

When it comes to Northern Ireland, flags are a major contentious issue and had a large part to play in the recent ArbCom case, see Northern Ireland flags issue. There's also the matter of flagcruft. The way you have it now, with no flags, is an improvement, IMO - Alison ^❤ 00:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know all that. I'm involved in the current mediation, and I've contributed to the "flagcruft" discussion many times. But I thought that the anti-UB folks were in favor of the Union Jack as the only legal flag to represent NI. For example, back in May, I was pestered by those editors into adding the union variant to Template:Country data Northern Ireland so that you could use {{flag|Northern Ireland|union}} to render Northern Ireland. Therefore, I remain puzzled why my edit (as described above) is problematic. Andrwsc 01:00, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand your frustration. It's often the case, though, that any flag associated in any way with NI is going to be problematic. Best off with none - Alison ^❤ 01:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Boxers from Belfast fight under the Irish tricolor - just like I dont object to the Ulster banner being used to denote footballers who play for Northern Ireland and the Northern Ireland football team then the Irish tricolor should be used but boxing articles as they fight on an All Ireland basis and box under the Irish tricolor.--Vintagekits 13:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

This comment is a non sequitur. In that table, the flag was not associated with boxers from Belfast. It was used to identify the location of the 2001 World Amateur Boxing Championships, an event that included boxers from 67 different countries. So let me ask again — what is your objection to using the Union Flag associated with the location of Belfast, similar to the (previous) remainder of that table, where the national flag of each host city was used? Andrwsc 18:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

1. Because neither flag is the flag of Northern Ireland - its like saying that the swastika is the flag of Germany. 2. The games were awarded to and organised by the AIBA who fight under the Irish tricolor.--Vintagekits 18:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The obsessed admin

Just a word of clarification, VK. An "involved admin" was clarified as meaning an admin that is involved in the substantial dispute; ie, they were directly involved in the editing of the page in question. Just so's you know - Alison ^❤ 01:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Alison, I cant stand that man, he is not welcome here and has no business here - he is half the reason that all this mess started in the first place with his power trip - he is just raging that he didnt get me banned - the guy is obsessed and only comes on here to provoke. He is an "involved admin" - I hate him, he hates me - we couldnt get less involved! Dont worry I wont lose the rag with him, he's not worth it - please just go over to his talk page and tell him stay of me talk page or I will be making a formal complaint.--Vintagekits 01:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be very wise if the pair of you made a point of avoiding each other. I suggest Rockpocket takes VK of his watch list and vice versa. There are many admins and Arbs watching VK so Rockpocket can truly can relax on that score. Giano 02:24, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

This is exactly what I havew been saying for over a month - its an easy solution and he is obviously just trying to provoke a situation in a hope that I will react.--Vintagekits 10:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Vk, PLEASE stay off Rock's page (even though he isn't objecting). Let's see if we can persuade him to recuse himself from enforcing the Arbcom - but abusing him (or retaliating, whatever) on his page ain't helping you. Let's be cynical for a mo; you think he welcomes you on his page 'cos he likes reading your opinion of him???? T-H-I-N-K.(Sarah777 02:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC))

I wont be posting there again and wont be replying to his messege here either or his provoking emails.--Vintagekits 10:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Warning

I totally endorse Rockpocket's warning, [4] which was extremely lenient. I think you should have received a block. He is doing a good job of attending to the ArbCom ruling and has every right to post on this page. Kindly stop telling him not to. Kindly stop making personal attacks and accusations against him or I will block you for harassment. Tyrenius 12:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Wait a minute Ty, I wasnt even aware that the terms on the probation had been agreed - the first I heard of it was this morning when another editor emailed me and informed me. I will not back away from confronting his twisted and bitter agenda when needed.--Vintagekits 12:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

P.S. he hasnt every right to post here and EVERY time he does it will be immediately deleted.--Vintagekits 13:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you read the ArbCom ruling very carefully. There's no excuses for not being aware of it. You don't actually own this page, and if any admin (or other editor for that matter) needs to bring something to your attention, then they do have the right to post here. Tyrenius 22:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy, by personal attacks. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail [email protected]. I warned you above to stop making attacks on User:Rockpocket. You replied and immediately made another one, above, disparaging him. This block is for 24 hours. If you continue to attack him or any other editor, the block will be increased. Note to any reviewing admin: see previous conversation at User_talk:Rockpocket#Get_off_and_stay_off_my_talk_page. Vintagekits is currently under ArbCom probation. This block has been logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/The_Troubles#Log_of_blocks.2C_bans.2C_and_probations Tyrenius 22:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Irish names

Hi, I've stared a discussion on the provision of Irish names in biography articles on the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland/Gaeilge project page and would appreciate your views on the matter. Beir Bua!--Damac 21:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Nah probs, cheers for the invite.--Vintagekits 21:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)