User talk:EarlyBird

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome from Brian0918 2 Manchester 3 [[1]] 4 cut n paste moves 5 City of Manchester 6 Spam 7 An Automated Message from HagermanBot

[edit] Welcome from Brian0918

Hello, EarlyBird, 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:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
• 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, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. 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! — BRIAN0918 • 2005-08-19 20:22

[edit] Manchester

I suggest you look at Talk:Second city before you start up all this crap "again". G-Man 21:08, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

And I suggest you listen to consensus on the site instead of rushing off and doing your own thing. Why do you believe Birmingham's should be the only article referring to "second city" when so many people disagree with you? EarlyBird 21:12, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

By so many people do you mean the opinion poll of 1000 people carried out three years ago by Marketing Manchester, immidiatly after the Commonwealth Games. G-Man 21:23, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

No. I mean: 1. A poll carried out by MORI to the same standards as all opinion polls worldwide 2. Comments made by Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/news/s/144/144945_prescott_ranks_manchester_as_second_city.html

It's quite simple really. How does Birmingham have more claim to the title of second city than Manchester does? EarlyBird 21:30, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes that is the poll I was talking about, carried out three years ago, immidiately after the Commonwealth Games. What exactly does the opinion of John Prescott have to do with the price of fish?. The same article states that he also said Birmingham was the second city. Is this the best you can come up with. G-Man 21:52, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

The best I can come up with? How about PUBLIC OPINION, or does that not matter to you? Does public opinion come second to your opinion?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=%22UK%27s+Second+City%22&btnG=Search

The first Google page about the UK's second city. Which city happens to be mentioned in almost all of the links on that page?

Stop being immature and editing it. Your bias is clear. I am trying to follow public consensus in the articles to show that BOTH cities are considered by large numbers of people to be second city. You, however, seem to have a very biased outlook on things. EarlyBird 21:54, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I think this is a general controversy as you acknowledge, as the Talk:Manchester page will testify and as mentioned in that article you (EarlyBird) source above. I'd think it would be better if you came on to the talk page to discuss this - it's hard to discuss something properly in edit summaries. Glad to see discussion here at least. You live in Manc by the way? Thanks. Cormaggio 21:59, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi Cormaggio. I'f go to this discussion if I knew it was restricted to there. Unfortunately I see it going on in multiple places and I see the fact it is disputed does not stop users like G-Man from editing it to claim otherwise. I am trying to edit whenever I can to use the word "some" in both articles. That way it gives no false indication of numbers and does not imply one has greater right to claim than the other. EarlyBird 22:09, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

I think that wording should be fine, but note that this has been a bone of contention for yonks - see User:Khendon's exasperation at Talk:Manchester#Second_city_petty. And yes, discussions do tend to overlap over groups of pages - can you imagine what the people monitoring Israel-related pages must have to go through? But it's always better to go through a talk page to scan it for controversy when you're in the middle of a heated situation - even if it doesn't cool you down, it shows you that other people have covered similar terrain. Welcome (belatedly) to Wikipedia! Cormaggio 08:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] [[1]]

Please participate in this discussion regarding the state of redirects on Manchester-related articles. --Celestianpower ^hablamé 15:34, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] cut n paste moves

PLEASE do not do cut n paste moves anymore, please move normally. SeeHelp:Renaming (moving) a page on how to move pages normally. If that doesn't work, list it on Wikipedia:Requested moves - DO NOT under any circumstance do a cut and paste move. Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 19:36, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, as mentioned below please use edit summaries. Anyway it does look like a good job there on the manchester articles and remember that you can always ask an admin for help if need be! Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 23:31, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] City of Manchester

Could you refrain from removing large sections of text from articles without explaining why in the edit summary? If required, explain on the talk page and refer people to it. For large or contested removals, please garner consensus on the talk page first. Thanks. Rob Church ^{Talk | FAHD} 20:08, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spam

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. IrishGuy ^talk 02:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policy for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. IrishGuy ^talk 02:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. IrishGuy ^talk 02:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 02:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)