Jump to content

User talk:RobinCarmody

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

Headline text

[edit]

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. You don't need to add your name to your edits. It is recorded automatically in the page history. Here's some tips:

  • You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
  • You can sign your name using three tildes, like ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
  • Remember to use the show preview button before you save a page.
  • If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

Other useful pages are: how to edit, how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 06:26, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)


Please do not sign articles. Your contributions are always tagged with your username, and other editors can contribute too, so you are not the sole author of the page. However, your contributions look great, and keep contributing :) Dysprosia 10:21, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

On the other hand, you can and should sign comments on talk pages. (I noticed your comment at Talk:Revenge of the Cybermen.) The best way to do that is by typing four tildes (~~~~), like I'm about to: —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 16:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. If you're interested in Doctor Who, you might be interested in joining the Doctor Who WikiProject. See ya around the 'pedia! —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 16:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[edit]

A user named TuomasTumour appears to have vandalised your User Page so I have deleted his "contributions". If I have accidentally erased anything you put there, please accept my apologies (you can retrieve the information from the History page). 23skidoo 19:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know when/if you'll get this, if the date of your latest contributions is to go by. But still....

I've just noticed your edit to Middle-market. I've been wondering about this for a while.

My guess that whoever wrote it really did mean the Morning Star. But indeed, the information on Wikipedia seems inconsistent. Middle-market used to list the Morning Star as an example, List of newspapers in the United Kingdom lists it among the downmarket tabloids, and The Morning Star itself states "it is entirely free of the celebrity gossip and other trivia that feature in all the other national dailies", suggesting that it should fall into the category of serious papers.

Do you read the paper? Indeed, have you seen it recently, and if so, where? What is your own judgement of its market level (if that's the right term), as opposed to political stance? -- Smjg 11:08, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your claim

[edit]

""Homey" has made sneering anti-socialist, the-free-market-is-the-answer-to-everything remarks"

What in the world are you talking about?Homey 15:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can't be bothered to try and find it - I think it was in one of the talk pages for the various articles on groups to the right of the Tory party which you are so curiously interested in. Apologies if it was CJCurrie and I've got confused. RobinCarmody

I can assure you I've never made any such comment and I'd be surprised if CJCurrie ever did. I'd appreciate it if you removed that personal attack from the AFD (personal attacks on the nominator don't help your case anyway and are also a violation of wikipedia policy). In future, don't smear someone based on what you "think" you remember from somewhere, particularly if you "can't be bothered to try to find it". Homey 22:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be quite surprised if I made that remark as well, here or elsewhere. CJCurrie 23:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GLF

[edit]

Not born in Australia and that should therefore be removed. Yes, he lived on a family Station after university for four and a half years (he has never denied that) but he was born at home, in Lanarkshire. His brother, though, and his mother, were both born abroad. The family were constantly on the move and seem to be buried on four separate continents from what I have read. Both sides of his families had interests in Australia and California, and South Africa. I recall him saying that his grandparents met at a colliery owners ball. 81.131.96.167 16:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reopened Stuart Millson AfD

[edit]

In the light of an apparent serious externally-directed abuse of process regarding the original Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuart Millson discussion, I have reopened the AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuart Millson 2 with the proviso that anon IPs/new accounts will be excluded as probable sock- or meatpuppets. You voted last time around, so you may wish to take a look at the new vote. -- ChrisO 23:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hen Fap

[edit]

It is something that you need to have: confirm/deny?

JW

[edit]

Hello Robin. You're very kind to check my Wikipedia entry. Thank you.

May I let you know that, although you, with good intent, extended my contribution to "Ads Infinitum" to the year 2000, it was actually my friend and colleage Jacob Yapp who helped to continue the series, for I was involved in family issues in Australia at the time? I was only involved directly with the 1997 series. However, it's nice to be thought about!

yours truly, J --John Warburton 22:55, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, John. Good to speak again after all this time (I remember when you were still John Hayward-Warburton, when I first joined MHP-chat). I've revised your entry accordingly. Robin Carmody 23:36, 9 August 2006 (BST)

Smith

[edit]

Murdoch orders The Sunday Times to attack Victor Lewis-Smith? You are kidding, aren't you?! (See you are a comedy writer - you're not another intimate of Smith hassled into tarting up his image on this page, by any chance?) If you read the original (very long and well-argued) article in the Sunday Times, you will see that the writer defends the BBC against Smith's (among other things) illegality. So your defence fails (your argument depends on the Murdoch press attacking the BBC, not some comic, which the article doesn't do). So we've cleaned this up.

And if you *are* Smith-compliant, do tip us a couple of stories for the book: [email protected] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.114.111.10 (talk) 14:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I don't know who you are and I don't think you know who I am either. I am not a comedy writer and I have never had any contact or connection whatsoever with VLS. In fact, I think he utterly undermines his condemnations of the importance of social class in this country with his attacks on those who transgress such unwritten rules. However, I consider him to be a talented and intelligent man, but even I dislike him I would disapprove of attempts such as yours to use a Wikipedia article as a platform for a personal vendetta. That is against all Wikipedia rules and is wholly unencyclopaedic.

As one who had to suffer Paul Donovan's writings for far too long, I can say from bitter experience that he is a sad reactionary nostalgic who, if put in charge of the BBC, would render it so laughably outmoded and fossilised that it would soon become irrelevant and lose most of its audience. Beyond that, he writes for a newspaper crossowned with the media organisation which has effectively forced the BBC's hand on these issues, so his comments are riddled with hypocrisy and humbug in a way they would not be if he wrote for the Sunday Telegraph or the Mail on Sunday. Do you, for example, agree with his attacks on Tim Westwood in 1999 and 2000, which were basically saying "kill, kill, kill the nigger-lover" in more polite language? Do you agree with his neo-McCarthyite paranoia about nests of "Guardianistas" under the bed at the BBC? Do you think it's a mortal sin for a Jamaican-born DJ to host a Radio 1 show whose title spells "Night" as "Nite", as he apparently does?

I can only assume that the "book" you are planning will be a character assassination built on lies and false rumours. I think I'll give this sort of tawdry exploitation a miss. I mean, don't you have any golden retrievers to kick? RobinCarmody, 5 December 2006, 18:03 GMT

Robin:

1) We owe you an apology. You are not a comedy writer: for how we stupidly arrived at this false conclusion see the web page www.offthetelly.co.uk/authorindex.htm (which we looked at far too swiftly).

2) However you also owe us an apology: we know our business and our biography of Mr Smith is certainly not as you describe. Apart from anything else "a character assassination built on lies and false rumours" will not pass the (serious) libel lawyers of the (serious) publishers we are involved with (Ian Hislop knows the name of the firm but we're trying to keep all hush hush for the mo). It is a fun book and if he was not so paranoid, we are sure Smith would enjoy the humour. We have other jobs so can't yet concentrate on this full-time but the material coming in is a gas.

3) As to Paul Donovan of the Sunday Times, you may have a point in general. But as to the specific article cited on the page, so far you seem to be the only person with the view you have added to this site. We'll try and rework things to mutual satisfaction. User:VLSmithBook

Interesting that VLS apparently went to a boarding school. Confirms my view that the journalists with the most intense hatred of such institutions are, indeed, those who actually went there (c.f. a great many NME / Melody Maker writers). RobinCarmody, 27 December 2006, 22:52 GMT

I see you've contributed to the article above. This was (semi)-vandalized recently by User:Jacques Arnold. I've reverted back to your version, but have merged in some of the new information that the above user entered. It does however need some wikifying MNewnham 22:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right, done that. Also reinstated my comment about the Springbok Club which I'm sure was there before. RobinCarmody 19:00, 6 December 2006 (GMT)

An imposter?

[edit]

Just a warning that an anonymous user made a post with your signature at [1]. Do you know anything about this? -SpuriousQ 02:14, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. I do seem to make enemies fairly easily, but I suspect it's just some troll. RobinCarmody 03:05, 22 December 2006 (GMT)

Trolling bullshit deleted. RobinCarmody 23:40, 30 December 2006 (GMT)

Seems you are popular with some Obie Trice and Justin Timberlake fans. I've reverted some vandalism to your user page here: [2]. -SpuriousQ 05:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check the history of your user page: you're getting a bunch of vandalism. You might want to request protection. -SpuriousQ 22:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My values and my ideals seem to have got up a lot of people's noses, and I have made a few reasonable guesses as to who the vandal/s might be, based particularly on the replacement of my livejournal link with a link to the Poptimists community (of which I have been a harsh critic, inspired by ideals which my critics consider "elitist" and "reactionary").

How do I request protection? (Sorry for not knowing that.) RobinCarmody 00:44, 15 January 2007 (GMT)

Come now, don't be coy. Why do you criticise the Poptimists?

I really shouldn't be answering anonymous posters like this, and I'll probably regret it later, but I criticise them because they are enemies of the European cause in Britain and because they think it's 1999 forever. RobinCarmody 01:57, 16 January 2007 (GMT)

Try Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. I could request it for you, if you want. -SpuriousQ 00:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do. I think some people would take it more seriously if it comes from someone other than the user himself. RobinCarmody 01:49, 15 January 2007 (GMT)

Done. Your user page is s-protected so that only established users can edit it. --BigDT 02:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I noticed that User:Jacques Arnold removed you comment about lecturing to the springbok club. obviously its something he might not want to appear in the article, can it be externally verified? MNewnham 14:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Care to re-visit your recent edit to Hilton's page ? It does not appear to make sense now ! Regards,

Derek R Bullamore 10:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, it makes sense now. The song was never a US number one, that's why I changed it. RobinCarmody 23:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have reinserted a cut from one of your edits to the John Drummond article, which removed the edition of the Carpenter book I had used. By all means cite the page reference from the hardback edition of The Envy of the World as well, if you have access to it, but I would argue that anyone checking the source is more likely to use the Phoenix paperback.

Incidentally, I recently removed from the article on the Third Programme a comparison to BBC4, which seemed unsustainable. By all means change my decision if you consider it invalid. Cheers! Philip Cross 19:26, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. And I agree that the Third Programme and BBC Four are not directly comparable. BBC Four is a stimulating channel, but it is a product of the age of cultural relativism. It does not confine itself to high culture and it does not hold the absolute confidence in the superiority of what it does that the Third Programme held. RobinCarmody 20:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to ITV Play Westcountry. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Tiptoety 03:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


[edit] ITV Play Westcountry

[edit]

Okay, next time instead of blanking the page i might Recommend that you either put the article up for speedy deletion, go through a AfD, or redirect the page. Thank you for letting me know your intentions. Tiptoety 04:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and remember to do that next time I see such an entry. To be honest, it's never come up before because I've never previously seen an entry that was so blatantly fictional. RobinCarmody 05:05, 21 August 2007 (BST)

An article that you have been involved in editing, The Scene That Celebrates Itself, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Scene That Celebrates Itself. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 14:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your recent edits.

[edit]

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 02:52, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Swinton circle

[edit]

An editor has nominated Swinton circle, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swinton circle and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. 217.134.225.37 (talk) 14:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Attlee

[edit]

On this edit of yours: Clearly something is very wrong here, what with Clem Attlee rising from the grave to write a blurb. I'm not sure that Bryant ever wrote a book titled The Elizabethan Experience but he did write one titled The Elizabethan Deliverance, which indeed doesn't seem to have been published while this Attlee was alive. Feel free to chime in at Talk:Arthur_Bryant#Attlee. -- Hoary (talk) 11:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I've changed the book title and changed the link to the then Earl Attlee (the second of three so far). RobinCarmody (talk) 16:33, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Times

[edit]

Robin, I am being taken to task for an edit I made to the article a few years ago. Do you have any citations to substantiate my recollection? Chheers and thanks. Philip Cross (talk) 19:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's an update on Philip's page which can be summed up as "the article from the Times was less than accurate", actually. However, it was most helpful that you were able to provide the Times article in the first place. Thank you. DS (talk) 13:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Border Television

[edit]

Hi Robin

I notice you've edited the Border Television page, and whilst I'm sure you did it in good faith, your comment that you've restored reality is incorrect.

You are confusing Border Television with ITV Border. Much of the content I removed from the page was relevant to ITV Border and should be placed on a page about that entity. I worked for the original Border Television for nearly thiry years and am now its owner and managing director. I therefore have intimate knowledge of its history and am in the unique position of understanding what the company is currently doing.

I had suggested in one of my first edits that a new page be created for ITV Border so that material relevant to that company be placed there. This is something you may want to give consideration to. However, such information has no place on a page about Border Television.

If you'd like to discuss this I'd be happy to chat it through with you. If you go to the company website at www.border-television.co.uk you'll find a number to reach us on.

I'll look forward to hearing from you, but for the moment I have reverted the entry to the current, accurate representation of the history and present position of Border Television.

Best wishes,

Ian Fisher Managing Director Border Telvision —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calfofman (talkcontribs) 01:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Springbok Club

[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Springbok Club. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Springbok Club. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gillian Baverstock

[edit]

Thank you for your addition to the Baverstock article. However, in your edit summary you wrote "explained reasons for estrangement with sister (easily sourceable)" yet, despite being "easily sourceable" you didn't provide sources. --Richardob (talk) 21:16, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. Sheer laziness on my part. A source is there now. RobinCarmody (talk) 00:37, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the previous Telegraph link was dead - I've updated it. The Sunday Times Oxford Literary Festival link is also dead - not sure where an equivalent would now be (if anywhere). RobinCarmody (talk) 00:46, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

[edit]

Hello RobinCarmody! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 4 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 8 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

  1. Mike Prince - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  2. Christopher Robbie - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  3. Alan Parry - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  4. Tom Edwards - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 04:11, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Frank W. Burns

[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Frank W. Burns. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank W. Burns. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

[edit]

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.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:45, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Potential nice factoid

[edit]

You added this interesting fact. Do you have a reliable source to back it up? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 19:06, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Mike Prince 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 a person or group of people, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Killerdove 11:57, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

The article Mike Prince has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:N: Unable to find reliable, secondary sources providing significant coverage of this announcer.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. joe deckertalk to me 18:41, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Taylor Parkes has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Searching didn't turn up sources about this person.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gigs (talk) 14:48, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted

[edit]

Thanks for correcting the dates on the Galileo article. Head-slappingly obvious once they're pointed out, but I managed to miss them.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 22:01, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto for Grand Lodge Tigerboy1966 (talk) 02:04, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National day for the United Kingdom

[edit]

Hello Robin, I fixed your nomination of National day for the United Kingdom there was an error in the deletion discussion (step 2), I also completed (step 3) adding it to the log for that day, notifying the author & I fixed the UK delsort page. May I suggest that you use Twinkle when nominating articles for deletion in future as it does all steps in 1. Regards ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 21:16, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

C A Lejeune page

[edit]

Thanks for this - I inherited her set of MFB so feel close to her! Pity there isn't a more positive quote about her writing though. I will try and find one!!YellowFratello (talk) 17:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Marcus Lipton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pop (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:33, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Now That's What I Call Music 9 (UK series) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"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:
  • #[[Pepsi & Shirlie)|Pepsi & Shirlie]]: "Heartache"

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:10, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained deletions

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Rocknrollmancer. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Mansfield 103.2 FM without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If you would like to explain your edits or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Your unexplained actions appear to be normal for you, which I find surprising for a reviewer. As I am sure you will be aware, unexplained changes - particularly deletions, can be regarded as vandalism (I have removed the level 1 hidden template from this message). Thank you.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 04:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delia's Play for Today title music

[edit]

Hi Robin and thanks for all your work writing for internet. You seem to be everywhere! :)

Saw your comment on Play for Today titles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WRSF4QsfpU - and just thought I'd let you know that the weird one seems to have been created by Delia Derbyshire - see http://wikidelia.net/wiki/Play_for_Today_-_Title_Music

Blessings Martinwguy2 (talk) 09:43, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Bird's Eye View (TV series)
added a link pointing to Robert Lang
Freda Kelsall
added a link pointing to Earthfasts

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Omni Flames. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Huntingdon Racecourse without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I have restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — Omni Flames (talk contribs) 23:50, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Lucas (actor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Run for Your Wife. 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) 09:27, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Geoffrey Bayldon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page All Creatures Great and Small. 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) 09:43, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi can you take a look at Samantha Smith?

[edit]

Hi can you take a look at Samantha Smith? I know that it's featured, but it was made featured years ago when standards for featured articles were different. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 01:20, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, RobinCarmody. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, RobinCarmody. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the YouTube links you added, as it wasn't clear that they came from an official source. Ideally, if linking to YouTube content, the content should verifably have come from the original distributor or copyright holder.

I appreciate you added them in good faith, but try to be more cautious when adding links in the future.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:10, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

[edit]
  1. ^ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. ^ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

[edit]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Terry and June, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Listener. 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) 09:53, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bros

[edit]

Sorry, I had to undo some of your recent edits to the Bros page to undo a flood of vandalism from the same user using different IP addresses and accounts. If there is new information you added to the article after the recent vandalism commenced, could you please add it back? I had to undo the vandalism, as a page protection request was denied as there hadn't been enough recent evidence (reversions) of vandalism to warrant it. Hopefully there now will be.02:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

What I did was to remove erroneous chart positions for certain songs in certain countries which were not confirmed by the links given for them, and which had presumably been added by someone wanting to talk up their achievements beyond what they actually did. I'll go back to the page now. RobinCarmody (talk) 15:06, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've now removed certain bogus claims made for the success of their second album and bogus mainland European chart peaks for the singles from it, which seemed to me (along with some other instances of hyperbole) to be the main issue. RobinCarmody (talk) 15:14, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese site

[edit]

Why are you still removing Portuguese charts? You are using http://portuguesecharts.com/, right? So why are you denying there's a singles chart hosted on the site when right there in the sidebar, it says top 100 singles? The site didn't used to have a singles chart; now it does. The links you've removed from both Havana (Camila Cabello song) and now Gucci Gang have the singles peak right there below the track listing (if they have one) on the song pages. It has a listing of weeks as bars with "45/2017" (or the applicable week) and the peak next to it. I don't understand what the problem is: click http://portuguesecharts.com/weekchart.asp?cat=s That's the chart right there, that you're claiming isn't on the site. Ss112 01:32, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies; I obviously didn't check properly. RobinCarmody (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, RobinCarmody. 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]

Television South

[edit]

I see you deleted Music in Camera as it was a Southern Television programme. I'm pretty certain we used the same title for TVS programmes made wth the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra. Unfortunately I can't find a secondary source for it. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 21:50, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you ex-TVS, then, and do I know you from anywhere? If they were called that, they weren't listed as such in the Times (or maybe the TVS variations that listed it were in too small a typeface)? Might try other newspapers. RobinCarmody (talk) 22:28, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in the Guardian, Observer, Express or Mirror post-1 Jan 82 apart from the BBC programme, btw. RobinCarmody (talk) 22:42, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charlie Chester, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Listen to the Band (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) 09:59, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Frances Line) has been reviewed!

[edit]

Thanks for creating Frances Line, RobinCarmody!

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

A well-written, useful article.

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

Learn more about page curation.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:13, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BBC Radio Timelines

[edit]

Thank you for your additions to the Radio 1 and Radio 2 timelines. If you can further add to these, and to the other radio timelines, it would be very much appreciated. Rillington (talk) 20:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anglosphere comment

[edit]

Hello Robin. I was slighly bemused by your comment at the Cray Valley PM AfD about me accepting the "Anglosphere Only Movement". I've created at least a couple of thousand articles on things like elections, referendums, political parties and places in non-English speaking countries (including many on football in Israel). Not sure if you were referring to the previous debate on the Thai club, but I also !voted to keep in that AfD. I am aware that systematic bias is an issue on Wikipedia and have regularly commented on that during AfDs on topics such as this or this Cheers, Number 57 22:01, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accusation of racism

[edit]

You've been around long enough to know better than to make accusations like this [3]. Acroterion (talk) 16:26, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let me make the position clear. It is not about racism, "classic music", how famous someone is perceived to be, or the opinion of "the Mail reader in the Surrey street". It is about notability. The guidelines that Wikipedia operate under in this respect are well defined - although you are welcome to challenge that in the appropriate talk page. Tremz is not-notable - simple as that; and the list includes those that are notable, not those that might be/could be/should be.

Based on all that, your edit has been reverted, although I personally will not do so again, as I have better things to occupy my time.

As is mentioned above, accusing another Wikipedia editor of racism is a slippery slope - you might care to retract that ludicrous statement.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 17:50, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, RobinCarmody. 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]

Remote stations

[edit]

In what way does adding "geographical" improve these articles? In what other way would they be remote? Britmax (talk) 23:16, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Scottish Singles and Albums Charts, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages STV Group and Newcastle Journal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mathilde (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scott Walker (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) 13:42, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

[edit]
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) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

[edit]
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) 01:16, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John Benson (announcer) for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Benson (announcer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Benson (announcer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

4meter4 (talk) 03:42, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

List of artists who have achieved simultaneous number-one UK Single and Album
added links pointing to Ticket to Ride, Are You Lonesome Tonight?, Let's Dance and Blondie

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
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) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

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) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Transmitter sites

[edit]

Thanks for your support on the various transmitter site article deletion nominations I've made lately. I'm trying to clean things up a bit - it feels like over the years, various users have added all the transmitter sites in their local area (the Scottish Borders, SW Wales, etc) to the encyclopedia as part of a little project, and there's no real rhyme nor reason why these have articles and other minor relays don't.

I wonder if in a hypothetical situation these sites didn't have names, and they were called (for instance) "Arqiva Mast 13044B", whether people would see them as warranting articles. Vodafone UK is notable, the Vodafone UK mast serving Hawick is not, even though the mobile mast probably serves more people more often than the legacy TV relay these days. But because the TV transmitter is rather grandly called the Hawick television relay station, it sounds more major than it is.

I'd even go as far as to suggest that in the absence of coverage other than "this site was built and exists", some of the "major" sites may not warrant articles, although I think that may cause some anoraks to pop their zits in frustration. For instance, why does The Wrekin transmitting station need an article rather than a couple of lines in The Wrekin? It's just another frequency list. As an example, Willis Tower has an article which includes a bit about the mast on the roof - the mast doesn't need its own article. WINS (AM) has a mention of its transmitter location in its article, but the transmitter doesn't warrant its own article. Broadcast infrastructure is not somehow special. Anyway, thanks for backing me up in the face of anoraky resistance. Flip Format (talk) 10:55, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The article Graham Goode (broadcaster) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:34, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Arthur, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arthur Marshall.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:37, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Iamreallygoodatcheckers. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Donald Trump, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Iamreallygoodatcheckers talk 14:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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 2024 (UTC)[reply]