User talk:Jamesinderbyshire

19 October 2024
News and notes: One election's end, another election's beginning Recent research: "As many as 5%" of new English Wikipedia articles "contain significant AI-generated content", says paper In the media: Off to the races! Wikipedia wins! Contest: A WikiCup for the Global South Traffic report: A scream breaks the still of the night Book review: The Editors Humour: The Newspaper Editors Crossword: Spilled Coffee Mug
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

/Archive 1 (24 June 2009 - 29 August 2010)

/Archive 2 (30 August 2010 - 3 October 2010)

/Archive 3 (4 October 2010 - 2 January 2011)

/Archive 4 (3 January 2011 - 1 September 2011)

/Archive 5 (2 September 2011 - 18 March 2012)

Hi, my first name is James and I live in Derbyshire, England. I am English by origin but have travelled extensively internationally. My main interests are generally in history, politics, religion and also specifically in the geography, landscapes, culture, history and beliefs of people in the British Isles and Europe. I specialise in the history and archaeology of Roman and Sub-Roman Britain and also have a keen interest in Byzantium and related fields like the Holy Roman Empire and Late Antiquity. I am not an archaeologist or historian by profession, but a keen amateur, which has pluses and minuses.

You are viewing the user page of a BBC-fan, particularly of Radio 4 and BBC Four. The latter is a wonderful source of programming in a huge range of fascinating topics and I recommend it to international audiences who want to learn about Britain. For US citizens in particular, BBC News Online offers a welcome factuality and depth of commercial-free coverage often lacking in US media.

Derbyshire is famous for some rather lovely stately homes like Chatsworth and Haddon Hall, but it also has a lot of pretty countryside with gentle uplands, little stone walls and charming villages.

Please feel free to leave me a message - if you do, don't bite my head off, I'm sure it's something we can work out!

Please see Talk:2007–2012_global_financial_crisis#RM_on_hold Smallbones (talk) 15:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I put some thoughts here, a little belatedly. Hopefully constructive and a help. I'll see responses there. Thanks and cheers. Swliv (talk) 21:17, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my comments on the Scotland talk page. I'm sorry if you thought my suggestion to Britishwatcher that a blog was more appropriate for any political opinions was in any way nasty. It was certainly not my intention and I'm still not sure if it comes across like that but I acknowledge that you saw it that way. I would also hope that I would be fair enough and neutral enough on an article talk page to tell someone with an opposing view to Britishwatcher that their political views and desires did not belong there. Regards. Clay More47 (talk) 13:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, there is actually a difference though between what he did (calling the Scottish Nationalists in general "separatists" - not specifically labelling other editors that) and what you did (a direct personal negative), so I would ask you to be a little more careful in tone. Everyone has opinions and everyone comes to these articles with political and cultural views and attitudes and experiences spinning in their heads, so it isn't a matter of views "belonging" or "not belonging" but simply of being cautious how we express them, me included, as sometimes I lose it a little and really shouldn't. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 13:17, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't think it was a direct personal negative when I said that a blog would be more appropriate but I won't labour the point. I know that your post on the talk page was full of good intentions and I wish you well. Regards. Clay More47 (talk) 13:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

James, a couple of days have passed so hopefully a calmer outlook has returned. You threw out a ton of accusatory remarks about my post-topic ban behaviour. I'm genuinely concerned and puzzled, both as to the vehemence in your language, and the accusations themselves. For now, leaving aside those 3 insect articles where I believe my edits will be shown to be correct and proper, what AFD's are you thinking about? I checked my contributions and I've a single AFD in that time, in a completely unrelated area. I've a single CSD for Eggs and Marrowbone which at the time was a single line and unreferenced. But that's it. Please clarify. --HighKing (talk) 10:36, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

James - not sure if you saw this. I'm waiting for a response before taking any further action. Thnx. --HighKing (talk) 23:15, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What action would that be exactly? Be careful what you wish for is my response. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 23:17, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a simple and polite request, and you respond with yet another threat. You've made a number of accusations. I'm asking you to either explain or I'd ask you to withdraw them. In terms of actions, we could take it to Dispute Resolution, or ask a neutral 3rd party to examine the edits. I'd prefer to start with hearing where you're coming from, especially with your accusations of me being on a campaign. You've also accused me of filing AFD's and editing a large of number of articles deleting "British Isles". Both statements are untrue. --HighKing (talk) 23:50, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't a threat, I took your comment to be a threat and was warning you that it would be likely to backfire on you. If it wasn't a threat, that's fine. As regards the AFDs, I haven't had time due to an ANI I had to respond to, but if you state that it was only one, I will accept that - the point I am asking about is why given that you were heavily critiqued in the recent past for campaigning on removing BI, you have apparently promptly returned to the activity on being unblocked. I was also querying why (and I will go back to the project page in question when I get chance soon) some apparently strange activity was taking place in the Insect space supporting your editing goals. If it's all fine, that's OK. As you probably realise by now, I am against bias and POV in all forms in the BI space, if I go to far down that path and an apology is in order, I'll give it, but if you claim there is absolutely no basis for caution regarding your editing history in this area, then I would challenge that. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 11:40, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, great, thanks for responding. A couple points I'd like to address, and some explanations too. The number of AFD's in this space was exactly zero. I believe the total number of articles I've edited relating to "British Isles" since my Topic Ban was lifted last June is 6 (including those 3 insect ones). One of which is a result of my (finally) getting and understanding why "British Isles" doesn't always require explicit references (if I'm honest, a big blind spot on my part in the past) especially if the underlying fact is true (see Janet Horne where I inserted "British Isles", because I have dates for the other areas like the Channel islands and Ireland, etc).

I was "heavily critiqued" in the main by a sock farm, not by reasonable editors that took the trouble to engage in discussion. How much time did I spend on BISE and other areas? Other critique mainly commenting on the constant stream of "British Isles" related articles I edited and demands for explicit references. And my Topic Ban was not related to any imaginary "campaign to remove British Isles", a term introduced and favored by the sock farm to attack the editor and not engage on content matters. Seems like whenever anyone wants to avoid listening to an argument, it comes down to a "campaign". But since my Topic Ban, I haven't done any of that. Which is why when you make statements like:

• You also appear to be AFD'ing some articles that contain BI as an alternate.
• it looks to me from your recent conduct as if you are simply returning to type and following a removal strategy via different gamings.
• putting AFDs on articles that just happen to contain the BI string where you can't see an obvious plan of removal and (in this and other cases) making deletions in unreasonable cases where the commonname BI is perfectly reasonable.
• Since you were blocked because you repeatedly campaigned on the removal of BI
• I have been observing your conduct in this area for a long time and have reached conclusions about it, as have involved admins

etc, etc, you might now understand why I've said your comments were unjustified. I understand also why you (and others) might have a basis for caution. But you've no basis for some of the language and tone used, and you've no basis for the serious allegations and wiki-character assignation. Jeez, it's not like my wiki-reputation is very good, but I thought most editors could see through the BS put out by the sock farm. Obviously not. Hell, seriously, Skype me or email me if you feel you want to get to the bottom of something quickly, it'd save time in the long run and probably be more productive and less stressful.

Thoughts? --HighKing (talk) 14:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with a lot of the points above, let's email, I'm on WP-linked email as well. I will try you tomorrow. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 18:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

James, only saw your comment at Cailil's page now. Thanks for that, I appreciate the kindness. If you're happy to do so, I'm happy to draw a line under the ugly part of our exchange. Still happy to hammer things out over email, etc. --HighKing (talk) 19:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thought I'd wait a week before poking again, let the dust settle. What's a good forum for exchanging views, especially on the articles involving insects? --HighKing (talk) 13:23, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another poke. Cmon James ... you said you'd discuss, you mentioned email. I believe you are in serious error on the insect articles and due to the fuss I want this resolved before I edit any more. --HighKing (talk) 12:10, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi James, I haven't heard anything back from you and you appear to be spending time away from WP. I've waited nearly a month and based on what you've written at Cailil's Talk, I understand you've no objections to correcting the insect articles. I've reverted two we've talked about already. I don't have time to go about doing any others just now but I intend to get around to those articles in twos and threes depending on when I can. Hope the break is going well and I look forward to your return. Take care. --HighKing (talk) 16:52, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:27, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've made clear my view that admins should give you a another long break from Wikipedia as you clearly prefer offense rather than reasoned debate as your modus operandi. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 19:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've asked them to block him? You utter coward. Matt Lewis (talk) 01:28, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment - given the spurious nature of his assault, which has been designed to try to misuse the process, it was the least I could do. Please don't muddy my page with one of your 2000 word rebuttals by way of reply. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 07:33, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have another Wikipedia account? You are so familiar it just bleeds from every word you use: I can't get that idea out of my head. Matt Lewis (talk) 08:40, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure the allegation is a friendly and well-intentioned one! Maybe you can simply stop being abusive? If you could try that for a bit, things might improve. Go on, be bold, try it. If any admin is reading this, I am happy to prove my identity offline BTW. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 08:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, James. I've featured a heartfelt ANI sigh by you at the top of my talkpage. If you'd like it to be credited to you on the page, as opposed to just by diff, feel free to make it so. Bishonen | talk 12:32, 12 September 2012 (UTC).[reply]

LOL, no, I won't take the credit, but it's amusing to see my little mini-rant featured so prominently. I think I just got lumped in with other battlers at that page - I've seen this before, you arrive at a zone where there is a long history of conflict, make a suggestion which seems OK-ish and the attack dogs leap at you from all directions! :) Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 12:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe your suspicions may be correct that Kerfuffler is using multiple accounts at the same time to edit. They showed up in this dispute discussion after 13 days, with no prior participation. I think this should be investigated, but I don't know how to do it. Thanks. :) --76.189.97.59 (talk) 23:50, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too clear how you start one either, I think it's called a "sockpuppet" investigation, I will do a bit of digging and find out. He had a good old bash at me in an ANI that he wasn't involved in, which made me think something was up, as it was probably one of his other accounts that was involved. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 11:09, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly the type of thing I'm seeing. He gets passionately involved in issues long after they begin, even though he had no prior involvement in them. And after just a few edits on the account, he was reciting Wikipedia guidelines and processes like an expert. Thanks. --76.189.97.59 (talk) 23:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For real! Prioryman (talk) 20:06, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. You couldn't make it up. Clearly. :) Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 21:01, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it proves anything, it's that people have always been a bit weird... Prioryman (talk) 21:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Be sure to check an external URL before you add it to an article: verachok.com actually redirects to [1]. PKT(alk) 13:54, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks, I think the URL is basically correct as it's recently pointed to several of her sites alternately, so not sure if this matters? If it does, I will change it. :) Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 13:57, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That may be so, but it certainly can't be her official URL. Maybe her actual URL has a different suffix? PKT(alk) 13:58, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is her official URL, but she redirects it - I thought that was permitted? If not, I will change it to the bitchmonsteridiot one. That is her own site. Thanks for your input. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 14:00, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vera Chok, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Theatre (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) 09:20, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vera Chok, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Garrick. 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) 08:59, 18 July 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) 14:04, 24 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) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 09:10, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jamesinderbyshire. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Hello, Jamesinderbyshire. 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]

Hello, Jamesinderbyshire. 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]

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) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Good Immigrant, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:00, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jamesinderbyshire, I know you're active in Wikiproject Derbyshire. One of my articles Low Pavement, Chesterfield, a street with 13 Grade-II listed buildings, 2 Grade-II listed light posts, and the home of the Chesterfield Market has been nominated for deletion, can you weigh in on the discussion? Thief-River-Faller (talk) 20:59, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]