User talk:Leithp/Archive 1

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page is for messages up to the end of December 19 2005.

Please post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarising the section you are replying to if necessary.

Welcome

Sorry, it seems that nobody has given you a formal welcome to Wikipedia. So if you do not mind...

Welcome!

Hello, 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:

• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

Zzyzx11 (Talk) 12:07, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi Leithp

Just letting you know, you forgot to sign your vote at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Victor Beck. Regards, Jayjg ^(talk) 21:26, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Cheers Jayjg, now corrected. Leithp 16:37, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Montgomery

Given the nature, extent and timescale of the atrocities committed by forces under Montgomery's control while he was Commander of the Cork area, I don't see how he can avoid bearing some of the responsibility for them. Cork became a hotbed of anti-British sentiment precisely because Montgomery and other British officers there fell into the trap laid for them by the IRA: they allowed themselves to be goaded into vicious reprisals against people they were supposed to represent, Irish subjects of the United Kingdom. A major factor in this was the contempt in which Irish Catholics were held by many members of the British establishment, especially army officers (even those with Irish connections). Even if Montgomery did not directly order any outrages, which I doubt, the length of the leash he gave his officers was unpardonable. I intend to expand the Anglo-Irish War article, it needs a lot of work.

Lapsed Pacifist 02:29, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I understand your NPOV concerns. The names of some reference books have recently been added to the IRA article. I'd like you to research this further, the web does not have a lot on it. Incidentally, some information on the Essex Regiment article was new to me.

Lapsed Pacifist 02:24, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Formatting

Hi Leithp, according to our Manual of Style all songs are to be placed in double quotes and all albums are to be placed in italics. Happy editing!!

Ianblair23 00:04, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please do not mess with Islam and Slavery Uncensored page

It is part of a new proposal covered on the Islam talk page.--Urchid 3 July 2005 16:32 (UTC)

Sorry!

I've been an admin for a week, so I'm new at this. Thank you for pointing that out. --Woohookitty 07:31, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Rommel

Hi, and thanks for the warm welcome. Regarding the ongoing edit war on the Rommel article, I suggest that you try and check the article's talk page, where you will see that, so far, I'm the only one who has actually tried to achieve and agreement, to no avail: Molobo continues to remove my edits with no dicussion at the talk page. Regarding edits from anonymous IP adresses, I must recognize that is my fault, but not on purpose whatsoever, it was only due to my ignorance of the logging system which won't happen again; and as you will notice at the talk page, I have atributed such edits to myself in order not to create confusion. If you can think of a way to mediate on the current war edit with Molobo, be my guest, for there is no way to reason with him, like I've already experienced. Hugs. Cadorna 12:50, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi again, Leithp! Things are going nowhere on this issue. As you will see, Molobo has once again stepped over the opinion of his peers, in this case you, by ignoring your recommendation completely and re-added all his POV to the Erwin Rommel article, with no discussion nor explanation. You might want to check my suggestion at the proper Talk Page. I wanted you to know that, as you see, I do take your advices seriously, but honestly don't know what else to do. Cadorna 18:39, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Ethics of the bombings

Well, I told you I merely intended to tease you, and in fact, I didn't invite you to engage in such a discussion; I excused myself up front of doing so, for we could add nothing useful to the issue. And like you, (tongue firmly in my cheek!) besides from the former USSR position, a vast quantity of reputed personalities have give strength over the years to my position too. Have a nice day! - Shauri 07:51, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

The Mark Inside

No offence taken whatsoever—I didn't write the article and had never heard of the band before, but when I came to it all I could see was horrendous grammar, spelling, capitalisation (lack thereof, really)... unsigned comment by A strolling player (talk · contribs) 18 August 2005

Richard O'Connor

Thanks kindly for your help with this article. It needed some polishing and Wikific, but I was too lazy and apathetic to do so myself. Cheers M8:) --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 07:43, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

More than just the editing help, you've rekindled my interest in the article again! What think you, with some more polish and additions...maybe...peer review and then perhaps FA?? --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:09, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Removal of Link

I don't see why the link was removed on Edinburgh - it was a link to a RELEVENT page on Edinburgh, giving a more personal feel to it, and there was no commercial value of the page either. Before removing my link why not see if other people think it was useful, because the opinion of one person doesn't always mean it's the right opinion. - evianboy

WE DID IT!

"Fox killed in open.." We've gotten Sir Richard his FA to add to his other abbreviated titles. Can I have a HI 5 M8;)--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 18:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Highlanders

Hi, I'm going to blame the text limitations of the edit summary box for my edit causing confusion :-D The origial text was incorrect; The Highlanders (Seaforth, Gordons and Camerons) continues the lineage of a completely different regiment, The Cameron Highlanders. That clan sure had a lot of members! Hope that clears it up. Take care. SoLando (Talk) 09:07, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Looking back at the edit summary I now believe poor grammar is to blame for the confusion. Sorry about that. SoLando (Talk) 09:48, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Leithp!

I didn't want to miss the chance to drop by and congratulate you for your success with Richard O'Connor and your first FA! I've enjoyed the article a lot, and moments like this, one can see how much can be learned from WP every day. Thanks to you and Ghost for an awesome read!

I also remember that odd business between those two users as the lowest time by far of my contributions. I've detached myself completely from such skirmishes, and both my work and my wikistress have far better and healthier conditions than then.

It's great to see you around again. Congrats again, party on, and hugs! Shauri smile! 19:40, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Hold the front page

Thank you!

Not only do I not mind, but I owe you THANKS again Bro. I was unaware of this step in the "getting an FA to the main page" process. I thought some shadowy committee or mysterious member of the cabal chose which FAs would go up on what days. Of course, once it goes up, we will have to protect it for a while from vandals, crap edits and geeks bearing well-meaning but wrong-headed "improvements". And when it does go up I'll Insist you share the credit too.

--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 08:20, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Craigellachie Bridge, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Do we really want this?!

My dear friend and fellow Wikipedian,

A proposal has been made here which could effect the way all featured articles, and perhaps even eventually all articles, are handled in the future. While it has the well-meaning intention of addressing some real problems, if it is adapted, I fear it will actually create more problems and possibly destroy the wonderfully open and collaborative nature of the Wikipedia we all so love.

I therefore, strongly urge you to join us who OPPOSE this potentially dangerous proposal. Thank you for your time, thoughts and words.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 08:25, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

PS This is a message I've posted to all my friends and in all my project discussions. Please feel free to use it and sign your name to it. Afterall you alerted me to the danger;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 08:25, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

CONGRADS ON THE DYK!

Cheers M8;>

For your fine article on bridge over troubled waters have a beer.

Cheers! The sun's not yet over the yardarm in this part of the world, so I'll save it for tonight. Leithp 10:41, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to congratulte you too! Great work on getting a DYK and thank you for your work on Douglas Haig. I really appreciate it :-) Take care. SoLando (Talk) 01:07, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

"The sun's not yet over the yardarm"...My Uncle Lloyd is the only other person I've seen or hear use that expression, until now. So here's to seagoing tradition Gents! At least the RUM part of it and not the other two:> --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 16:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Horrocks

Hi, I'm always happy to help :-) I googled using "Middlesex Regiment" Horrocks, and came up with these links [1] [2] The London Gazette's online archive is also quite helpful (it's just a pity it only goes back to 1900 :-(). Keep up the great work on Horrocks! SoLando (Talk) 10:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

????

I'm only asking about the Loc Ness Monster. WE, over here in the states had a controversy in which someone had claimed to find some skeletal material, a tooth that allegedly belongs to this creature. What is going on ? I am NOT trying to offend you at all, just trying to find out WHAT is behind all of the fuss.

Should I go to the article itself ?Martial Law 09:05, 4 November 2005 (UTC) :)

NO! The question did NOT have anything to do with nationality. Was trying to find more info. on this creature.Martial Law 09:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC) :)

Shauri

Dear Leithp. I saw your message on Shauri's talkpage. One day soon, you will be seeing her edits reappear :).--Wiglaf 07:56, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Front Page

So tell me how does the light shine in the halls of Sham-bol-ic? :> Sorry, I can never resist the opportunity for a bad joke. No wonder it's a bloody shambles...it's a democracy! So I went ahead and voted. Voted for some other artys I strongly supported there too, such as the Texas Ranger Division, Mark Felt and the US Navy Marine Mammal Program. Damn fine reading all. Amazing how much talent we have here. So we will just have to ROCK THE VOTE...only wish we'd know sooner though. Doh! "To those who say 'What did the president know and when did he know it?', let me say this; If I knew then what I know now."--Richard M. Nixon--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:44, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Since I'm here

To my dear comrade Leithp, for his outstanding work on British Generalship in general and British Generals in particular, --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:58, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Long overdue and WELL deserved!

Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Hollaback_Girl

I noticed that you cast a vote on the FA nomination for Hollaback Girl, and you don't seem to have been notified on your Talk page that User:Raul654 has cleared and restarted the nomination. If you want to recast your vote, you should do so at the article's new FA page. --keepsleeping say what 04:28, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I was going to review the article again before voting but I haven't got around to it yet. Leithp (talk) 09:19, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Halibutt's RfA

Thanks. WikiThanks.

I would like to express my thanks to all the people who took part in my (failed) RfA voting. I was both surprised and delighted about the amount of support votes and all the kind words! I was also surprised by the amount of people who stated clearly that they do care, be it by voting in for or against my candidacy. That's what Wiki community is about and I'm really pleased to see that it works.
As my RfA voting failed with 71% support, I don't plan to reapply for adminship any more. However, I hope I might still be of some help to the community. Cheers! Halibutt 05:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

This might help

Go to Mysteries Megasite Homepage It has data about the Loch Ness Monster,a.k.a., Nessie. Click on the title Loch Ness Monster or Nessie. There are nearly 10-20+ websites that are about the creature. Heard some suggestions about depth bombing the Loch to force it up, just like some people over here in the States use dynamite to obtain fish. I think it is a idiotic idea to do that, its just that the "skeptics" want a body, and have declared this intent to get one, be it our Sasquatch, your Loch Ness Monster, a space alien, a Chupacabra. We have "skeptics" so skeptical that if you tell them they're alive, they will not believe you for lack of what they call evidence.Did'nt mean to be offensive, if so, I apologise for being so.Martial Law 00:35, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Again, I hope this website helps. By the way, heard that the Loch has some UFO activity going on in the area. Do NOT know if this is true. These UFO sites will be of help: UFO Casebook Homepage and [http://www.maar.us/ Malevolent Alien Abduction Research Homepage], and the Mysteries Megasite website will also have some UFO and Crop Circle data as well, since I had heard that the UK has been experiencing crop circles so complex that NO hoaxer would attempt, much less, execute. We get them here in the States as well, and over here, someone, like a "Doug and Dave", were to perpetrate something like that on someone's property WILL end up shot, especially in Texas,NM., other places. I am not familiar w/ UK laws about tresspassers, but over here in the US, especially in Texas and other conservative states, tresspassers are shot.Martial Law 02:20, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm not really interested in the Loch Ness monster or UFOs. As for the point about access; there is a public right of access to property in Scotland, although this does not apply to crop fields. Leithp 14:10, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

UFO conspiracies bore me too. But Iam interested in Cryptozoology, and try to keep up with the latest studies and discoveries (Unoffishal motto- "Remember the Coelacanth!". The "Loch Ness tooth" has been all but proven a hoax, at worst, or at the least a clear case of misidentification and misinformation. Most who have examined the photos agree, it is NOT a tooth, but most likely part of a horn from a young buck. About the only ones who disagree are the "Dudes" who found it and the self-appointed "Expert", who is regarded by credible Cryptozoologists as a crank, they brought in to tell them what they wanted to hear (Plus has a real, vested interest in selling books and tapes on the subject). If anything IS in the Loch, it is most likely some type of giant eel. And a spike-shaped "tooth", such as that, would be inconsistant with an eel or a plesiosaur for that matter. Now if ye really want to talk Highland monsters, laddie, there's Fear liath, Nessie's lesser known neighbor and possible Yeti relative.:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 21:57, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Back in my student days I used to read The Fortean Times but I don't follow the subject any more. Cryptozoology is a wide, wide subject though and encompasses everything from well-researched scientific studies to blurry photos to sell to credulous cranks. The Loch's worth a visit though, very picturesque. I tend to prefer the west coast and the islands for my Scottish breaks though. Leithp (talk) 22:41, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Welcome to the Projects

Hey Leithp! Saw you finally gave in to the dark side and joined our little Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history. Glad to have you aboard! My M8 User:Kirill Lokshin does most of the organizing, template work and such which frees us to write whatever needs to be written and/or catches our fancy. He also maintains the outstanding Portal:War, which alone makes him a Wiki-hero in the eyes of many.

Typing of heroes, I again should apologize for my ill-considered and unjust words towards one of yours-Sir Brian Horrocks. I cannot think of a better battalion or division commander of the war. But I do believe, in a way, he was also another victim of the dreaded Peter principle. While he clearly excelled at the operational levels, once he reached Corps command, he was no longer in his element. This does not by an means imply that he was an incapable Corps commander, simply less capable because the demands of the job were different, not necesarily more difficult. Look at our pal, Rommel...also brill at the small unit and divisional levels, one of the best corps commanders of the war, but once he got promoted up to the field army level, his brillance began to dull (Army command was the forte of the likes of Manstein, Zhukov and Bradley). So his level of less-competence was only one rung above that of Horrocks'. Ok, so it still sounds like I'm ragging on Sir Bernie...really I'm not. Time to try and channel old Plutarch again for a little Parallel lives, Here is whom Horrocks most reminds me of, and it is not another British or even WWII commander: Nicolas Oudinot, Napoleon's best and bravest division commander, who was wounded and captured more times than any of his other Marshals. Boney introduced him to the Tsar as "Le Bayard de l'armée français", The mighty warhorse of the French army. This is the subtitle of an excellent bio I found on him HERE. Read it if you would and tell me if it does'nt remind you a bit of someone. Brave and capable beyond measure, Napoleon entrusted him with his Grenadier guard division. But in 1809, Napey gave him a Corps and due to his bravery at Wargram (in which part of his ear was shot off, and he had it sewn up so he could rejoin the battle!), promoted him to Marshal of France announcing-"The Emperor has given the command of the Second Corps to Count Oudinot, a general proven in a hundred combats, where he has demonstrated equally intrepidity and knowledge." Which he had at the operational level, but the burdens and new demands of his new command, along with lingering effects from his many wounds, would take their toll. Henceforth, his career would shine not so brightly. He would be lackluster in Russia in 1812 and in Germany the following year he would lose several key engagements. He would attack strongpoints which were best by-passed, fight where withdral was best and withdraw when a fight was needed. March over clogged, rain soaked roads instead of cross country. He was not alone in this, many of Napoleon's Marshals were entrusted with large, important commands to which they were less than suited (Ney and Grouchy being the most infamous examples). Nevertheless, I have the utmost regard for Count Oudinot and for Sir Brian too. And you show good knowledge and judgement to hold him up as well. Cheers :>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 21:57, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

A well reasoned argument. Unfortunately one that I totally disagree with. Horrocks had a rather bizarre career during the war, he only ever commanded in battle at two levels: battalion and corps. As a battalion commander he gained great esteem with Monty and Alanbrooke during the BEF's retreat to Dunkirk and was earmarked as for the fast-track. They gave him 44th Division to train, which he apparently did to a very high standard, and later got him to form the Guards Armoured Division. Apparently he did well here as well, because the GAD performed well in 1944 9th Armoured Division. He probably would have been a good divisional commander, had he seen battle, but it's difficult to judge. As for Horrocks' ability at corps level, I give you two battles: his breakout from Falaise and the Mareth Line. In both he was inventive and very aggressive. I assume that you're basing his performance during the war on Market Garden. This was one of Monty's set-piece battles and didn't allow Horrocks to demonstrate any initiative. I also find it difficult to formulate an opinion on that battle, there are too many versions of events to get a clear idea of what went wrong and whether it was ever feasible. Horrocks has also been accused of shying away from casualties. I'm not convinced by these accusations and there were too many blunt-instrument generals in Britain anyway.

You're right about Rommel of course, he's the archetype of someone who should never have been promoted so high. Absolutely brilliant at divisional and corps level, but I've read too many stories of him commanding down at battalion or company level. He was beaten by a master army commander, of course ;-).

I should also say, that despite evidence to the contrary, that I'm not obsessed with British generals, I just think that Wikipedia is very light on them in comparison to your countrymen and the Germans. If I knew anything about the Soviets I would be writing about them because some of their articles are shocking.

I'll look into Oudinot, I'm sure that he must be an interesting fellow. There's a lot of reading there for me anyway. Leithp (talk) 22:30, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I'll grant you and Sir Bernie the Mareth Line. He deserves it for pulling off a classic flanking maneuver. Falaise WOULD have been a much greater victory if Monty had let his commanders loose (also don't you find it odd he chose the Canadians and Poles for the most important, difficult and dangerous work in that battle?) and Bradley (I LIKE Brad but must be fair) had not been so fearful of Fratricide. Market Garden was a magnificant failure which could have been a magnificant success. There might have been another factor which, literally, bogged down Horrocks and XXX Corps bedides Monty and the 88's and MG-42's: MUD. There's a History Channel series called BATTLEFIELD DETECTIVES which suggested that due to heavy rains over the previous days, the countryside was too muddy to cross, which kept the armoured columns on the roads...advantage Krauts. Watching that I could'nt help but think of Oudinot's situation at Grossbeeren. L'histoire se répéter, ne c'est pas.

Oh and I agree, Rommel was indeed beaten by a master army commander...WELCOME TO THE AUK. He was mopped up by a master staff/political officer;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:27, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Horrocks in his autobiography cites the main reason for XXX Corps failure to reach the Paras as German counter-attacks on the road. James M. Gavin's US airborne troops and another British division (whose name I can't remember) were left to defend the road behind XXX Corps. They had real difficulties against German armour, and so XXX Corps were slowed. Horrocks thought this was necessary as, if the paras were cut off, XXX Corps could try and get to them. If XXX Corps were cut off, there was nobody who could get them out. Leithp (talk) 11:23, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Anon page creation restriction

On Wikipedia:Village pump you asked:

As a matter of interest, is there a reason you don't create an account? I'm trying to badger you into doing so, I'm just curious as to what your reasoning is.Leithp (talk) 21:07, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

The motivating reason from nearly three years ago was to encourage others to scrutinize my contributions more thoroughly. I've found that that scrutiny almost always improves the end-result; if nothing else, typos get fixed. A few months after becoming an editor, I discovered a side effect, which was I avoid the good and the bad that comes with being part the Wikipedian culture. That has its benefits (the closer scrutiny of my work), but has its downside too. As the English version has grown from ~100K articles to nearly 900K articles, I found the need to rename articles or add images, so I did eventually get an account for those purposes.

I'll be curious to see if this new restriction on anon page creation stands; if it does, I'll probably contribute less often. Besides, with Wikipedia's higher profile, it has so many active editors that I've been reduced to contributing to pop culture trivia like Homer Simpson, This is Your Wife... :-) 66.167.253.134 22:44, 5 December 2005 (UTC).

It must make your participation, if any, in community voting/discussion like AFD and RFA quite problematic. On the other hand, I can completely understand why you might want to distance yourself from these. I agree that restricting anon page creation is a bad idea, it's just taking a little more of the "Wiki" away. Poor quality new pages aren't a problem anyway, they'll either be improved or deleted and hardly anyone will ever see them in the short period before this happens. Leithp (talk) 22:55, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

People are still pretty cool about letting anons participate in community voting. For example, work I had done with Category:Handbook of Texas citations was nominated for deletion in September, but no one challenged my right to lead what became a defeat of that proposal. I probably had to work harder to drum up support for my opinion, but no one ever discounted my anon status during the process. From time to time I've participated as a voter in other debates without my anon status being an issue.

I agree with your arguments for why restricting anon page creation is a bad idea. 66.167.253.134 23:45, 5 December 2005 (UTC).

I'm an anon user... err was an anon user. I finally got an account because I started getting multiple IPs and was too lazy to keep track of comments I got back at each. And one of the reasons for me to run for admin was to spite RickK (a notorious anti-anon person), IIRC. I still remember convincing angela to undelete a page after a particularly silly VFD ;-) Kim Bruning 04:41, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

This looks like a fait accompli. I can't see it reverting to allowing anon page creation, given what Jimbo is saying in the media. Presenting it as an experiment seems to be a bit misleading. Leithp (talk) 19:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Doubtless THIS was a decisive factor also. Wierd situation we have here- a founder of a First Amendment protection center and retired newspaper editor, is looking for his pound of flesh and berating the Communications Decency Act, not for violating the 1st amen, which it has done, but for protecting his online defamer who was merely exercising his 1st amen rights, albeit in an obviously WRONG way. If we are going to use this as a test case, the Tabloids should shut down now. Personally I'm divided on this issue. IP's do a lot of good and we all pretty much started out and fell in Wiki-love thusly. At the sametime they are also responsible for the vast majority of vandalism and a significant proportion of crap edits. Most of the ones who really matter end up registering eventually anyways. I'm not part of the "Cult Of Jimbo", but I can see where he's coming from on this. And I don't blame him...I blame the mainstream, old guard media-ocracy and of course lawyers (cherche les avocats :). If they have their way, I can imagine a future where these pages will be chock full o Google ads, or worse pop-ups and spyware. Our project must be protected from this...so something has to give. "Experiment" or no, Jimbo made a reasonable decision this time.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:15, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Admin

Sorry about the late-ish reply - I took a bit of a nap (well, a brief Wikipedia break) to prepare myself for Monday Night (American) Football :-) On the adminship, well I have no objections to becoming one - even if being subjected to the ordeal that is an RFA can be quite a daunting prospect. I guess its because I feel somewhat uncomfortable about nominating myself for such a prominent position as admin, which is a problem as it is seemingly the predominant way to become one. Can I just say that your query is quite coincidental, as I've been trying to pluck up the courage to ask you whether you'd like to be nominated for adminship! Would you consider it? You've been prolific in fighting the scourge that is the vandal - at least from what I've seen of your edits - and you actively participate in the Wikipedia community. I'd also like to join R.D.H in welcoming you to the military history project! Would you be interested in particpating in the arduous and mind-numbing efforts to replace all battleboxes with the warbox? I've pretty much been coverting them on my own, but my wiki-attention has been diverted somewhat by my pet-project - the King's Regiment and all of its subsidiary articles (original articles were/are awful, so I'm trying to rectify my mess and rewrite them all). Sorry for the digression there! Oh and aliens do exist - at least on the stree corners of Liverpool (sorry, I have issues with the scally ;-)). Anyways, take care. SoLando (Talk) 02:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

See my nomination on your user page, the query was mostly about finding out your thoughts re:adminship. I think that I'll run for Admin in the near future, so I may take you up on your offer. What does the warbox conversion thing involve? I've just finished an epic stub-sorting spree, so that could keep me occupied. Leithp (talk) 13:47, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I've accepted your nomination - thank you so much. Now the ordeal has begun *gulp* I hope a Leithp RFA is in the very near future :-). And can I just, I can assure you that I feel very proud to be nominated by you :-) The warbox conversion is pretty straightforward. Replace

{{Battlebox|

|battle_name=

with

{{Warbox

|conflict= (battle title)

|partof= (war/campaign)

Then delete the redundant parameters from the existing battlebox:

|colour_scheme

|conflict=

As you can imagine, C and P usually make these conversions pretty brief (though still tedious and mind-numbing). Now if I've just completely made these instructions incomprehensible, please ask Kirill :-) Take care. SoLando (Talk) 14:35, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

And back again :-D Yep, I'm done. As that's the case, would you like the honours to add it to RFA? SoLando (Talk) 14:38, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Considering its getting dark, I hope I see a shooting star right about now ;-) SoLando (Talk) 14:48, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Here's a glass of humanity's finest to say thanks for everything!

Thanks. I still reckon you should go for admin ASAP. I just checked your edit contribs for 7 December - if I was a vandal, I'd more than likely drown in my own tears! I wonder if R.D.H would ever consider going for admin one day. He doesn't seem to be too....enthused....about the whole thing, though ;-) SoLando (Talk) 04:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm not interested at the moment in becoming an admin. But once I have a few hundred more edits and maybe another FA or two under my belt, along with more friends to support me, I might be persuaded to accept a nom. Now is a bit soon, though and I'm still too much of a Wiki Noob to wield the mop with any sort of confidence. But thank you much for mentioning me as a serious contender SoL. I appreciate your confidence and kind words bro. The day you become an admin (VERY soon it looks like:) will be one I shall rejoice and the vandals will weep:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey, R.D.H. Yes, I completely understand. Got to say though, that the qualities you have so clearly shown as an editor and as a person (don't wretch!) would sway an RFA nomination, even if you didn't amass an army to vote for you ;-) Thank you for your kind words - I'll limit that so that I don't make my RFA thank you notice on your page redundant :-)

Leithp, the plans have begun - the cackling is unstoppable, the white Persian cat has been ruffled and the evil minions are preparing for a suicidal charge :-) By the way, your RFA is going excellently - I'll just shut up now and let you bask in the glory :-) Take care, dude (I've got to stop saying that - it isn't as if I have beach babes outside my front door!). SoLando (Talk) 11:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

A request for unprotection should have been placed at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection long ago. The dispute over the page's content appears to have ceased for the moment, so page protection shouldn't have continued for so long. There isn't even a protection notice at the top. If no one unprotects it once you place it at RPP, I'll do it :-) SoLando (Talk) 13:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Done. Leithp (talk) 13:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Secondary succession

Thanks Leithp :-) Anthere 14:58, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

International Collaboration

Hi. Welcome to the Intenational Collaboration Projekt for the topic Imperialism and world wars. It would be nice, if you could tell others from the project. Kind Regards, John N. 18:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

PS: Wikipedia:WikiProject World Wars - There you can find the english project for the topic. Would be great, if you take part. Regards again, John N. 19:04, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi John, I'm already a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history, which overlaps, but I have added my name to the project. Thanks for pointing this out. Leithp (talk) 19:38, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Good. Maybe you could also come to our chatroom in irc (#imperialismus). -- John N. 15:01, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I don't go on IRC regularly. If there is a particular issue you want to discuss, then you can leave a message here or email me and I will log on if I can manage. Leithp (talk) 19:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

SoLando's RFA

And so it begins, Leithp :-) Thank you for all you've done, I'll try not to emulate Gwyneth Paltrow, and will just say that I hope I'm able to fulfill the expectations that go with being an admin. If you see me mess up anywhere, have any concerns, please don't hesitate to tell me! Take care. SoLando (Talk) 09:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Category:Cinema of Scotland

Request for review. Please have a look at:

• Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_December_14#Category:Cinema_of_England_and_Category:Cinema_of_Scotland

I hope that you will consider voting Keep for both. Thanks.--Mais oui! 10:15, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations on your new mop! Sango123 (talk) 16:37, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia 04:50, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations, man. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 04:51, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

YEAH!! Welcome to the ev..noble "collective" of Wikipedians ;-) You totally deserve adminship. Great work, dude! I believe, however, that you may need to change your whole "image " ;-) SoLando (Talk) 05:07, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations! You'll make a good admin. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 16:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

A Mop For The New Sysop!

To Leithp, who will embiggen our Wikified community through his Cromulent use of the MIGHTY GOLDEN MOP!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 07:29, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations. May you wield the mop with honor and pride for the betterment of Wikipedia. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:19, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: John Ling

Please note that it's an autobiography. - Eagle^amn 13:03, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I noticed that. It certainly looks like it might be AfD material, but it doesn't fit the speedy criteria IMO. Leithp (talk) 13:57, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Why did you delete kneeguru?

Can you justify your actions? There is no patent on this stuff. People on wiki use words that are copies or mockeries of tons of copy protected stuff. I just wonder what made you SINGLE out my page. Why don't you focus on the stuff that is racist towards blacks, jewish and female or social classes. Or other articles that copy TRADE marked names. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cl0wn (talk • contribs) .

I deleted it because it met the criteria for deletion on sight, i.e. it was patent nonsense. Your recreated page is close to that as well. If you know of any racist pages or copyright violations please point them out to me, tag them for attention by another editor or clean up the offending pages yourself. Leithp (talk) 13:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I've looked further into this. The only content of the page I deleted was:

A urban term replacement of the term niggah. But to define being smarter. Now when this term is used correctly this is not a RACIST term. For example, when used in RAP songs, Parties And Social events to adress people Of a certian life style.

This does not always mean a certian RACE OF PEOPLE. It's more of were you live and your attitude. Kneeguru Is a term that would define some one smarter. Instead of saying "That niggah skewled dude today" You'd say That kneeguru Skewled dude today" Knee pronounced like KNEE.. And Guru meaning GURU. To be a master of something basicly, OR very smart.

This had been tagged by SoothingR as patent nonsense, I agreed and deleted it. At least one other admin agreed with me, because when you recreated it this morning Bunchofgrapes speedy deleted it as well. In any case, even if it wasn't nonsense, it is not an encyclopedic article and belongs on Wiktionary. Leithp (talk) 14:01, 19 ecember 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for dropping me a note on the subject. However, why do you want to AFD it? Can't we just get rid of it by applying CSD G4 and A1? -- SoothingR^(pour) 15:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Mainly because I wanted to get the point across that we didn't delete it because we're vindictive, we deleted it because it's policy. Leithp (talk) 15:25, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Someone else has speedied it. How long before it gets created again? Leithp (talk) 19:42, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Raul

that was unbelievable vandalism on the raul page.why would anybody do that?pure vindictive pleasure? Kinda crazy 05:24, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

If you mean this edit, then yes I reverted it because it looked like vandalism to me. Somebody clearly doesn't like Raul, presumably a Barcelona fan. Leithp (talk) 13:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage!

FireFox 21:17, 19 December 2005 (UTC)