BI Bardcom Options Rating

[TheKartingWikipedian]

Get a load of this editor. Yes, it's British Isles Bardcom. This guy has had it in for the British Isles for a while now, but has been losing arguments about getting rid of the article. So what's he doing about it? He's delinking it! Yes, this anti-British Leprechaun from Dublin is trawling the entire encyclopedia and removing every reference he finds to the British Isles. He's been at it for months now and so far has removed several hundred links to the main article. There's no stopping him. Every reason under the sun is given for getting rid of the dreaded term. Some of them are quite laughable. Sometimes he claims OR, often there's no reference, so out it goes. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

Funny thing is, it seems that Wikipedia is supporting him in this anti-British POV. A few have tried to stop him, but none have so far succeeded. Old Bardy has the world's longest watchlist - he watches EVERY article he's ever had the pleasure of removing British Isles from, and if anyone is foolish enough to re-instate it he calls them a vandal and threatens to block them. Not that he's an admin you understand. Not yet, anyway, but he seems lke suitable material. Oh yes, and there's the ad hominem (or ad homineN as he likes to call it) attack, that everyone whose had any dealings with him has been accused of.

Right now he's facing an RfA and he's also had an RfC, but he breezed through that and looks like doing the same with the RfA. He's so far managed to deflect all criticism and continues on his quest to rid the world of the British Isles. Reckon it'll be September time when the main article doesn't link to anything anymore, then it can go as well. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)

But there's good sport to be had here. At his most prodigious the old bugger gets rid of one BI link a minute and it's hard to keep up the reverts, but why not give it a go. Next time you spot him on a campaign revert his changes as fast as he's making them. You end up with dozens of simultaneous edit wars; it's bloody good fun I can tell you. But then you get banned, like I did. So do it as an IP. That really gets him going.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Bardcom

[Enric_Naval]

You broke ANI!

I also like how Bardcom is just trying to get British Isles to be used only as a geographical term, while TheKartingWikipedian is misrepresenting that by saying that Bardcom is plain out removing the term from everywhere, which is not correct. I dunno how many other facts you might have gotten wrong.

Anyways, an Arbcom case has been opened on the matter, and this means that this will be solved fairly, because Arbcom always gets all its stuff right, right? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Fix'ed. Thanks, Milton.

This post has been edited by Enric_Naval:

[Milton Roe]

You broke ANI!

I also like how Bardcom is just trying to get British Isles to be used only as a geographical term, while TheKartingWikipedian is misrepresenting that by saying that Bardcom is plain out removing the term from everywhere, which is not correct. I dunno how many other facts you might have gotten wrong.

Anyways, an Arbcom case has been opened on the matter, and this means that this will be solved fairly, because Arbcom always gets all its stuff right, right? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

I think you mean you broke ANI. Fix the link.

[dogbiscuit]

Note that Bardcom sites Wikipedia Review as a reason for his action coming to light - yet he does not deny it is what he is doing, just that what he is doing is not an obsessive one man campaign.

I wonder what other obsessives are slowly going around corrupting others work? What would a historian do in 100 years time if they tried to use Wikipedia as some form of snapshot of world opinion of the early 21st century?

[wikiwhistle]

Bardcom's been blocked again for his British Isles insertions edit warring. This time for 24 hours.

[Moulton]

Note that Bardcom sites Wikipedia Review as a reason for his action coming to light - yet he does not deny it is what he is doing, just that what he is doing is not an obsessive one man campaign.

I wonder what other obsessives are slowly going around corrupting others work? What would a historian do in 100 years time if they tried to use Wikipedia as some form of snapshot of world opinion of the early 21st century?

An historian might conclude that Wikipedia was dominated by an ad hoc ochlocracy comprised of anankastic antagonists.

[ComeGetMe]

Bardcom's been blocked again for his British Isles insertions edit warring. This time for 24 hours.

Methinks Bardcom has made some enemies....

He's saying he shouldn't have been blocked - that the 3rd edit wasn't a revert. Ha ha - I'm off to get some popcorn and watch the fun...

[guy]

Welcome, ComeGetMe.

[Milton Roe]

Note that Bardcom sites Wikipedia Review as a reason for his action coming to light - yet he does not deny it is what he is doing, just that what he is doing is not an obsessive one man campaign.

I wonder what other obsessives are slowly going around corrupting others work? What would a historian do in 100 years time if they tried to use Wikipedia as some form of snapshot of world opinion of the early 21st century?

With the intelligence and computational power of that far into the future, considering Moore's law, individual editing styles of individual minds of today will be about as obvious as a mother being able to tell, with her eyes shut and half asleep, which of her kids is crying and how badly they've been hurt. And the various editorical changes will be about as complex to read and easy to follow as the crayon scriblings of a 5 year-old on your wallpaper. So far as anything recorded goes, we textual analysis amateurs, with our limited time and resources, now see through a glass darkly-- but so long as it's preserved to history, all will be clear as day to the computers and minds of tomorrow. It would be sort of like having the computers at today's NSA break Enigma-- an afternoon's coding. Unfortunately, there are consequences to being able to do it in approximate "real-time" in 1943 instead of 2008. Some damage is being done now on WP that can't be undone. If somebody leaves the project NOW, THAT article never does get written. When it is finally written, it's not the same one. Meanwhile it isn't there to influence something else. A butterfly effect.

MR

This post has been edited by Milton Roe:

[Dzonatas]

This is very interesting.

93.107.68.59 makes an edit to change the British Isles text in an article. If you look at that IPs contributions, then you will notice several of the same changes.

ThrankunColl calls it vandalism:

Please stop vandalising pages by imposing political viewpoints on them. Otherwise you will be reported for sockpuppetry. TharkunColl 14:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

On the RFAR appear, Flonight makes an assertion that appears to include such comment as above by TharkunColl:

Accusations of wikistalking, misuse of edit summaries, labeling another user's edits as vandalism are several problems I noticed when taking a quick look. Likely that these issues are preventing the resolution of the content dispute. FloNight♥♥♥ 13:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The heart of the dispute, on the RFAR:

Statement by Kendrick7

This is rather silly. They haven't been the British Isles since 1919. That Americans still lazily refer to them as such is simply a reflection of our own ignorance of European history. I applaud any editor fighting such ignorance; if this appears to be an "obsession" it's only because the anachronism is so widespread among our pages. -- Kendrick7 05:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Bastun

A quick read of the article and its associated articles and talk pages clearly shows User:Kendrick7 is incorrect - the term is still in use worldwide, including by a minority on the island of Ireland (and I've just reverted his change to the lede of the BI article making it 'past tense').

On the RfA itself - User:Bardcom does seem to have an issue with the term and does try to eliminate it from many articles, some removals being dubious, some being valid, in my opinion. But its a content dispute and certainly not yet appropriate for an RfA. Bastun 09:17, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

There is some related history in The Trouble case, but I only glanced at that one, so far.

WMC's involvement in this relates to another event with
93.107.68.59, subthread link.

This RFAR makes it look like 93.107.68.59 actually fixed it to modern terms, but the dispute is to continue to use the old terms (BI), and Ireland is the rope in the tug of war.

Is there a WR-Popcorn fund?

[wikiwhistle]

This RFAR makes it look like 93.107.68.59 actually fixed it to modern terms, but the dispute is to continue to use the old terms (BI), and Ireland is the rope in the tug of war.

The term is still widely in use in the UK/England, and it's not inaccurate. Just arguably it's a geographical, rather than a political term.

Bardcom does often change the term without even looking if his edit makes sense or is factual. See here as one of many instances. He changes British Isles to England wih a spurious reason, one can only think he sort of gets 'on a roll' and goes on a rampage of doing it.

93.thingy was Goldheart though, not Bardcom.

[Dzonatas]

This RFAR makes it look like 93.107.68.59 actually fixed it to modern terms, but the dispute is to continue to use the old terms (BI), and Ireland is the rope in the tug of war.

The term is still widely in use in the UK/England, and it's not inaccurate. Just arguably it's a geographical, rather than a political term.

Bardcom does often change the term without even looking if his edit makes sense or is factual. See here as one of many instances. He changes British Isles to England wih a spurious reason, one can only think he sort of gets 'on a roll' and goes on a rampage of doing it.

Hmmm, and the side panel even shows the location as "England," too. Does anybody else think that edit by Calton, to change it to BI, looks like WP:OR? There is only one secondary source listed for the first paragraph of the article and the external links (mainly primary sources). That change is in the second paragraph that has no citation.

This post has been edited by Dzonatas:

[Gold heart]

This RFAR makes it look like 93.107.68.59 actually fixed it to modern terms, but the dispute is to continue to use the old terms (BI), and Ireland is the rope in the tug of war.

The term is still widely in use in the UK/England, and it's not inaccurate. Just arguably it's a geographical, rather than a political term.

Bardcom does often change the term without even looking if his edit makes sense or is factual. See here as one of many instances. He changes British Isles to England wih a spurious reason, one can only think he sort of gets 'on a roll' and goes on a rampage of doing it.

93.thingy was Goldheart though, not Bardcom.

You make a charge of "spurious", without even making a case, typically Wikipedia-ish. What is spurious about his edit in that particular instance. All he is doing is editing and encyclopedia and correcting instances of the term British Isles, a relic of a term from a dead empire. But the "empire" may not be totally dead yet, the British Isles Brigade are quick on Bardcom's heels, and wildly snapping. Think it's going to ArbCom soon, before it sinks Wikipedia. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

[guy]

The trouble is that there's no simple alternative to the term "British Isles" if you want to mean The United Kingdom, the Irish Republic, the Isle of Man and the Channel Isles. Many Irish people say "these islands", but you can't very well use that phrase in an encyclopaedic article to be read in America.

[TheKartingWikipedian]

The trouble is that there's no simple alternative to the term "British Isles" if you want to mean The United Kingdom, the Irish Republic, the Isle of Man and the Channel Isles. Many Irish people say "these islands", but you can't very well use that phrase in an encyclopaedic article to be read in America.

Would that be "in America -- for example"?

[guy]

Would that be "in America -- for example"?

If you wish. Obviously it would make equally little sense in Uzbekistan. However, I believe that there will be more readers of the English Wikipedia in America.

[Gold heart]

The trouble is that there's no simple alternative to the term "British Isles" if you want to mean The United Kingdom, the Irish Republic, the Isle of Man and the Channel Isles. Many Irish people say "these islands", but you can't very well use that phrase in an encyclopaedic article to be read in America.

This is where some lateral thinking comes in, Ireland and Britain don't have to have a collective name. Sardinia and Corsica don't have a collective name, even though they are right beside each other. The Japanese Archipelago excludes islands that belong to Russia, and there is no collective name for the islands around Iceland or NewZeland for that matter. So the term British Isles was correct until 1922 when Ireland ceded interest in remaining with Britain in the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland", what a mouthful. Out of mutual respect, and in conjunction of parity that Europe & EU offers, if the islands need to be called by a collective noun, then it should be "The British and Irish Isles". Most people from Ireland say "Britain & Ireland", alphabetically to show no bias, and biggest first too. Map-makers rarely use the term anymore, and it is avoided by the American Administration, the British Administration, and naturally by The Irish Administration amongst others. Barcom's substantive point is that the term is being used in an incorrect manner, and that is why he is making the changes.

[TheKartingWikipedian]

if the islands need to be called by a collective noun, then it should be "The British and Irish Isles".

Maybe it should. I wouldn't object. It's still a bit of a mouthful, but what the hell. Point is though, it isn't called that. It's called British Isles, like it or not. Wikipedia isn't the place to try and influence these matters. Please show me where, anywhere, it was agreed, by anyone, that BI ceased to exist in 1922.

Oh no, this is getting like a Wikiepdia Talk page. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) Forget that last sentence.

[TheKartingWikipedian]

Tell you what, he's a tenacious old bugger is Bardy. Have you seen his Talk page; he just won't give in to this block. Next thing the numbskull admins 'll be blocking his Talk as well. That happened to me when I was blocked for turning over a series of Bardy's edits. Could I persuade them to unblock me - not on your black and white telly! And I was completely in the right. The no-nothing blighters just would not listen, but then, admins, so what do you expect.

Give it up Bardy. You'll be back on tomorrow anyway. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

[wikiwhistle]

Tell you what, he's a tenacious old bugger is Bardy. Have you seen his Talk page; he just won't give in to this block. Next thing the numbskull admins 'll be blocking his Talk as well. That happened to me when I was blocked for turning over a series of Bardy's edits. Could I persuade them to unblock me - not on your black and white telly! And I was completely in the right. The no-nothing blighters just would not listen, but then, admins, so what do you expect.

Give it up Bardy. You'll be back on tomorrow anyway. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

If/ when he finally gets blocked indef maybe they'll let you back (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[ComeGetMe]

This RFAR makes it look like 93.107.68.59 actually fixed it to modern terms, but the dispute is to continue to use the old terms (BI), and Ireland is the rope in the tug of war.

The term is still widely in use in the UK/England, and it's not inaccurate. Just arguably it's a geographical, rather than a political term.

Bardcom does often change the term without even looking if his edit makes sense or is factual. See here as one of many instances. He changes British Isles to England wih a spurious reason, one can only think he sort of gets 'on a roll' and goes on a rampage of doing it.

93.thingy was Goldheart though, not Bardcom.

Well I agree with Bardy on that one, if its true that theres only temples in England and none anywhere else. If theres a temple in Ireland anywhere ok, I agree with Calton.

And how do we knoe Goldheart isnt Bardcom? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

[Dzonatas]

Would that be "in America -- for example"?

If you wish. Obviously it would make equally little sense in Uzbekistan. However, I believe that there will be more readers of the English Wikipedia in America.

I kinda took those thoughts as comparison of terms between the dispute of the Isles and the Americas.

Would on say that Salt Lake Temple is the oldest mormon temple in all of the Americas just because it is the oldest in North America?

Would on say it is the oldest on Earth?

Instead of different versions of one sentence that either state largest in X or the largest in Y, there may be instances where both need to be combined in some way. The largest in the X and Y. It appears that there is some wording to solve it that may be a mouthful, but this is written words that require no mouth to move where fingers do the work instead.

The temple is the oldest in North America[1], and it is the only temple known to have existed on the entire Earth when it was created[2].

That solves one issue, but there is another issue to address old terms with newer terms.

The temple is the oldest in North America[1], and it is the only temple known to have existed on the entire Earth when it was created[2]. It is also said to be the oldest in the Americas.[3]

We don't see much of a word dispute between calling something North America or Americas as we see with the British Isles or the United Kingdom of Britain and Ireland. I can imagine, in comparison of the dispute, someone will make another version of the above, like:

The temple is the oldest in Americas[3], and it is the only temple known to have existed on the entire Earth when it was created[2]. It is also said to be the oldest in the North America.[1]

Later, someone else will make another revision and delete the last sentence as superfluous, and drops the source.

The temple is the oldest in Americas[3], and it is the only temple known to have existed on the entire Earth when it was created[2].

Again, much later, were back to somebody else pointing out a source that says North America instead of Americas, and makes the change:

The temple is the oldest in North America[1], and it is the only temple known to have existed on the entire Earth when it was created[2].

At this point, we can see the whole thing becomes circular. People get frustrated because everybody is right. The circle continues until someone gets banned, and that banned user gets labeled with "disruptive troll" (a BLP issue), which makes the whole situation even worse. One of the edits was done by the banned user, so it gets removed in some end justify the means shout out:

The temple is the oldest in North America[1].

Kids are now wondering why just North America. There were 3 references that they could have studied, but now they are down to just one when they look at the article. Not only does the banned user suffer, but Wikipedia suffers for lack of references. That is where Wikipedia becomes more of a MMORPG and need a serious reality check.

And how do we knoe Goldheart isnt Bardcom? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

How do we know Gold Heart isn't SirFozzie and Bardcom isn't Alison?

This post has been edited by Dzonatas:

[LessHorrid vanU]

Would that be "in America -- for example"?

If you wish. Obviously it would make equally little sense in Uzbekistan. However, I believe that there will be more readers of the English Wikipedia in America.

Ah, yes... but what do you mean by "America"? Both continents plus the central bit? North America (and is that just the USA and Canada, or are you including Mexico?) only or simply the United States of America. See, if you put the dispute over British Isles (which include the Isle of Man - but not the Channel Isles) in a context of removing everything that is declared "American" - like the recent FA regarding REM, since do they play Peruvian nose flutes - because it is "incorrect" terminology you might see how a supposed rule applying motive is just a means to advance a political viewpoint.

The irony is, of course, that "Britain" is not a English/Scottish/Irish/Welsh concept anyway - but a Roman derived continental terminology regarding the once similarity of southern ''English" (for want of a better term) to the Celts of Breton. The British Isles were the Island group of the Breton type peoples - which, being Celt, would have included Ireland, Wales and Scotland (and Cornwall/Kernow for all you Celtic Nations folks). Britain, as a political ethnic grouping, only became apparent with the merging of the Kingdoms of England and Scotland - wherin the tribal backgrounds were mixes of Celts, Angles, Picts (and Scots), Saxons, Danes, and various other immigrants/invaders. Ireland, even with major populations of Pictish Scottish and Danish/Swedish Viking ancestory, was possibly the most "British" (ie. Celtic) of all the old kingdoms, principalities and Dukedoms, so it is amusing to have a Irish editor attempting to remove "imperialist/oppressor" links when it could be argued his nation is the most truly British Isle of all.

[TheKartingWikipedian]

How do we know Gold Heart isn't SirFozzie and Bardcom isn't Alison?

Don't know about SirFozzie, but with the other comparison we know because Bardcom's a man and Alison's a woman (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ph34r.gif)

He's still at it folks. It's Bardcom versus Mr Bumptious at the moment. They'd be better off over here. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

[Dzonatas]

Don't know about SirFozzie, but with the other comparison we know because Bardcom's a man and Alison's a woman (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ph34r.gif)

Joan of Arc is a woman, too!

[ComeGetMe]

How do we know Gold Heart isn't SirFozzie and Bardcom isn't Alison?

Don't know about SirFozzie, but with the other comparison we know because Bardcom's a man and Alison's a woman (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ph34r.gif)

He's still at it folks. It's Bardcom versus Mr Bumptious at the moment. They'd be better off over here. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

I'm backing bumptious if only cos admins always win and theres like 4 admins all over Bardy at the mo.

I'm nearly out of popcorn too. What about Bardys point that one of his edits wasnt a revert cos he didn't restore an earlier page. Or is that wikilawyering?

How do you know Bardy is a man?

This post has been edited by ComeGetMe:

[Gold heart]

Tell you what, he's a tenacious old bugger is Bardy. Have you seen his Talk page; he just won't give in to this block. Next thing the numbskull admins 'll be blocking his Talk as well. That happened to me when I was blocked for turning over a series of Bardy's edits. Could I persuade them to unblock me - not on your black and white telly! And I was completely in the right. The no-nothing blighters just would not listen, but then, admins, so what do you expect.

Give it up Bardy. You'll be back on tomorrow anyway. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

William Connolley is now accusing Abd of being a sock. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

See here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wil...y#Polite_notice

Thanks. I'm starting to wonder about Abd... the threats about trashing admin bits seem absurd rather than threatening, but its unpleasant behaviour. I wonder if its sock time yet again? William M. Connolley (talk) 19:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Whizz!! Is there any end to his intrigue? The plot thickens! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/huh.gif)


This post has been edited by Gold heart:

[wikiwhistle]

This RFAR makes it look like 93.107.68.59 actually fixed it to modern terms, but the dispute is to continue to use the old terms (BI), and Ireland is the rope in the tug of war.

The term is still widely in use in the UK/England, and it's not inaccurate. Just arguably it's a geographical, rather than a political term.

Bardcom does often change the term without even looking if his edit makes sense or is factual. See here as one of many instances. He changes British Isles to England wih a spurious reason, one can only think he sort of gets 'on a roll' and goes on a rampage of doing it.

93.thingy was Goldheart though, not Bardcom.

You make a charge of "spurious", without even making a case, typically Wikipedia-ish. What is spurious about his edit in that particular instance. All he is doing is editing and encyclopedia and correcting instances of the term British Isles, a relic of a term from a dead empire. But the "empire" may not be totally dead yet, the British Isles Brigade are quick on Bardcom's heels, and wildly snapping. Think it's going to ArbCom soon, before it sinks Wikipedia. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

It is spurious because someone had put that a certain temple is the biggest of its type in the British Isles, Bardy changed it to England saying there were none in Scotland etc. But if there are none in Scotland or Ireland or whatever then it naturally follows that it -is- the biggest of its kind in the British Isles, as the person who reverted him said in the edit summary.

This can be seen succinctly by simply viewing the diff, that's why I included it, rather than long-windedly go on about something that's so well described by the diff itself.

Don't know about SirFozzie, but with the other comparison we know because Bardcom's a man and Alison's a woman (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ph34r.gif)

Have you seen Bardie then, or are you just taking his word for that? Maybe it's all a cunning plan- Alison can always use checkuser to absolve Bardcom (i.e. herself (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) ) Gold heart is aware of the connection and that's why he attempted to get Bardcom (a.k.a. his long term enemy, Alison) into trouble. It's all a conspiracy!

Hey what can I say, it's been a long day lol (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[Gold heart]

It is spurious because someone had put that a certain temple is the biggest of its type in the British Isles, Bardy changed it to England saying there were none in Scotland etc. But if there are none in Scotland or Ireland or whatever then it naturally follows that it -is- the biggest of its kind in the British Isles, as the person who reverted him said in the edit summary.

This can be seen succinctly by simply viewing the diff, that's why I included it, rather than long-windedly go on about something that's so well described by the diff itself.

It's the only Temple of its kind in England or Ireland. The sentence implies that there are others, which is not true. So it's misleading. Can you not see? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

[ComeGetMe]

It is spurious because someone had put that a certain temple is the biggest of its type in the British Isles, Bardy changed it to England saying there were none in Scotland etc. But if there are none in Scotland or Ireland or whatever then it naturally follows that it -is- the biggest of its kind in the British Isles, as the person who reverted him said in the edit summary.

This can be seen succinctly by simply viewing the diff, that's why I included it, rather than long-windedly go on about something that's so well described by the diff itself.

I agree.

But its a wee bit of stretch to use the term British Isles for an English temple. Sure then we could say that the English queen is the only queen in the British Isles. Or that the Premiership is the only English tournament in the British Isles.

[wikiwhistle]

It is spurious because someone had put that a certain temple is the biggest of its type in the British Isles, Bardy changed it to England saying there were none in Scotland etc. But if there are none in Scotland or Ireland or whatever then it naturally follows that it -is- the biggest of its kind in the British Isles, as the person who reverted him said in the edit summary.

This can be seen succinctly by simply viewing the diff, that's why I included it, rather than long-windedly go on about something that's so well described by the diff itself.

I agree.

But its a wee bit of stretch to use the term British Isles for an English temple. Sure then we could say that the English queen is the only queen in the British Isles. Or that the Premiership is the only English tournament in the British Isles.

I suppose so. Not sure about it now you say it, it's sort of like wierd grammar or something and needs to be rephrased. But you can't deny Bardcom has a 'thing' about the British Isles, and it rubs people up the wrong way, as viewing his contribs does give people the impression of a Single Purpose Account designed to do a specific thing on wiki.

[Gold heart]

It is spurious because someone had put that a certain temple is the biggest of its type in the British Isles, Bardy changed it to England saying there were none in Scotland etc. But if there are none in Scotland or Ireland or whatever then it naturally follows that it -is- the biggest of its kind in the British Isles, as the person who reverted him said in the edit summary.

This can be seen succinctly by simply viewing the diff, that's why I included it, rather than long-windedly go on about something that's so well described by the diff itself.

I agree.

But its a wee bit of stretch to use the term British Isles for an English temple. Sure then we could say that the English queen is the only queen in the British Isles. Or that the Premiership is the only English tournament in the British Isles.

I suppose so. Not sure about it now you say it, it's sort of like wierd grammar or something and needs to be rephrased. But you can't deny Bardcom has a 'thing' about the British Isles, and it rubs people up the wrong way, as viewing his contribs does give people the impression of a Single Purpose Account designed to do a specific thing on wiki.

I'm not sure if Bardcom is removing references to the British Isles. He is trying to change BI context on a limited number of articles. There are thousands of references and links to BI, and he is only editing a few problematic ones. Connolly is over-reacting I think, but maybe he doesn't understand that Bardcom is trying to improve the encyclopedia. Connolly thinks it's an anti-British affair, and he being British doesn't like it. Sometimes Bardcom does get it wrong, as all editors do. As I say, "it's only a few articles that need fixing". (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)

This post has been edited by Gold heart:

[guy]

The "English queen" is a nonsense. She is queen of the United Kingdom (and quite a few other countries), and people here never refer to her as "The English queen".

OK, let's take a perfectly encyclopaedic statement. The article River Shannon rightly begins "The River Shannon (Sionainn or Sionna in Irish) is, at 386 km (240 miles), the longest river in the British Isles." How would this be put otherwise? The longest in Great Britain and Ireland, or The United Kingdom and the Irish Republic? The first would infuriate unionists, and the second might irritate some Irish nationalists. You could avoid it by saying (as indeed the article did at one point) "Ireland's longest river", leaving ambiguous whether you meant the island of Ireland or the Irish Republic, but that would be to omit important information.

[Alison]

How do we know Gold Heart isn't SirFozzie and Bardcom isn't Alison?

Don't know about SirFozzie, but with the other comparison we know because Bardcom's a man and Alison's a woman (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ph34r.gif)

lol - well you don't know either of those for sure, either (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

He's still at it folks. It's Bardcom versus Mr Bumptious at the moment. They'd be better off over here. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Trust me: I'm not Bardcom, and Bardcom is not Gold heart. No wayz.

EDIT: I just read Wikiwhistle's posting. I hereby absolve my sock as being a sock of me!! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

This post has been edited by Alison:

[Gold heart]

The "English queen" is a nonsense.

Sheese! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

Guy, are you and TharkumColl socks by any chance? Very timely posting. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=220949900

What's the point in saying "the longest river in the BI". It's the longest river in Ireland, and that's what matters, My old pal TharkumColl's posting is POV inspired.

I think I'll undo TharkumColl, and see what ensues. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

[guy]

I think I'll undo TharkumColl, and see what ensues. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

"BI is irrelevant and anachronistic + pass??"

And that isn't POV? Can someone please block that IP as a sock.

What next? Why not alter the article on Jeanne Calment to assert that she is the longest-lived person from Arles, rather than the longest-lived person in the world?

[Gold heart]

I think I'll undo TharkumColl, and see what ensues. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

"BI is irrelevant and anachronistic + passé"

And that isn't POV? Can someone please block that IP as a sock.

What next? Why not alter the article on Jeanne Calment to assert that she is the longest-lived person from Arles, rather than the longest-lived person in the world?

I think it's because of the fact that Jeanne Calment was the oldest living person in the world, that makes her so notable. I don't see an entry for the oldest living person in Hammersmith, or Hollyhead. They wouldn't be notable enough to get an article on WP.

To introduce the river Shannon as the longest river in the BIs is silly, and matters little. It's a river in Ireland, and that's why it's on WP, and that's the only reason. The term BI is not readily recoginised by most people throughout the world, and map-makers have ceased using the term.

I see TharkunColl has reverted with a typical POV summary. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=225583589

How long will that last? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mellow.gif)

[Dzonatas]

I think I'll undo TharkumColl, and see what ensues. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

"BI is irrelevant and anachronistic + passé"

And that isn't POV? Can someone please block that IP as a sock.

What next? Why not alter the article on Jeanne Calment to assert that she is the longest-lived person from Arles, rather than the longest-lived person in the world?

Maybe somebody will find the time to document all those edit-wars over the European isles, and it'll go down in history as World War III.

[guy]

map-makers have ceased using the term.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/blink.gif)

I see TharkunColl has reverted with a typical POV summary. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=225583589

How long will that last? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mellow.gif)

He's been impeccably non-POV. I hope that there won't be more socks making POV edit summaries.

[Alison]

&oldid

map-makers have ceased using the term.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/blink.gif)

I see TharkunColl has reverted with a typical POV summary. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=225583589

How long will that last? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mellow.gif)

He's been impeccably non-POV. I hope that there won't be more socks making POV edit summaries.

Gold heart trolling again, eh? Should I block him or just sit on my hands, then (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)