User talk:BigDunc

Note: If you post a message here, I'll reply here for continuity. If I post a message on your talk page I will have put it on my watchlist, so you can reply there.

If you think an edit I have made is incorrect, please do not assume it is deliberate. My own perception that I am completely infailable is unfortunately to my great annoyance incorrect. I do make mistakes. Ask me about them, fix them or discuss on the talk page. Assuming that I'm violating wikipedia's policies on purpose will be regarded as Troll like behaviour - and any such comments will be removed without discussion, thanks and Happy Editing. BigDunc^Talk 15:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

START A NEW TOPIC ON THIS PAGE

-- Trolls will be removed with Extreme prejudice!

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:BigDunc.

vista, vista damn that bloody vista!

hi bigdunc, just a personal thanx for your suggestions, hope to find a way to use my zen with me 'puter, why is there not a universal language for machines? it's just binary after all! BTW is that a tesseract on your userpage?Perry-mankster (talk) 21:22, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem just a pity you didn't get it sorted and it sure is a tesseract puts me in a trance lol. BigDunc^Talk 21:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise

Look, I'm not trying to offend you or anything and naturally its not my intention to be 'unhelpful', but I'm begging you to comment helpfully on the talk page. You may not agree with me, but at least try to formulate some sort of defense rather than ignoring and reverting me and the issue at hand. NewIreland2009 (talk) 21:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have not reverted you on the article you asked about sources I told you what the policy was. I have not given any opinion on what you added to the article. BigDunc^Talk 21:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm saying is that is essentially unhelpful. In fairness, if your not going to analyse the individual situation (I'm sure that the policy works well in other areas) then really, whats the point in posting at all? I'm not trying to be offensive but in fairness I thought your post was unhelpful. NewIreland2009 (talk) 21:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Knowing policy is never unhelpful you said you didn't feel that a source was required, but that doesn't matter if one is asked for then it must be produced. This is wikipedia policy. I am offering you some advice as new editors often find themselves blocked because they were not aware of policy. Now in my opinion it seems you have come to wikipedia with a preconcieved idea about editors based on what your friend has told you, and your comments can be read as provocative. The vast majority of editors here are editing with good intentons read assume good faith and happy editing. BigDunc^Talk 22:07, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How can you possible expect me to assume good faith when you constantly revert me and accuse me of being a troll? NewIreland2009 (talk) 22:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

I've reported you on ANI. NewIreland2009 (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thats good thanks admin eyes are needed. BigDunc^Talk 22:30, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have commented on the deplorable conduct and continuations personal attacks by NewIreland2009. Admin eyes are definitely welcome. --Domer48_'fenian' 22:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to wait before commenting myself but a new editor going straight to ani their friend has told them a lot pity nothing on policy. BigDunc^Talk 22:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had a friend who left wikipedia in complete frustration after spending over a year editing Irish related articles. I haven't seen anything here to change my mind. And yet still, my question goes unanswered. I guess its easier to accuse someone of being a troll and of vandalism than trying to understand what they are actually saying. I probably shouldn't get so worked up, but when met with passive aggressiveness there seems no other choice other than to be aggressive. I am what you make me unfortunately. NewIreland2009 (talk) 22:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"passive aggressiveness"? "I am what you make me unfortunately." We are all responsible for our own actions, the They made me do it defence dose not work here. Please remain civil. --Domer48_'fenian' 22:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All I'm asking is that the same standards are applied to more established users than for me. Still, my question left unanswered. NewIreland2009 (talk) 22:50, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question? BigDunc^Talk 22:51, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its on the Michael Collins talk page. People were more concerned with me reverting and namecalling than attempting to see where I'm coming from. And then I'm told to assume good faith. This is what I mean when I say 'you are what you make me.' NewIreland2009 (talk) 23:01, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it the question that I answered above and on the article page? BigDunc^Talk 23:02, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to clarify. I've already stated that the policy works well, but you don't seem to recognise that I recognise this. My point is that on this particular case, the policy does not apply - a la my Easter Rising example.

Citations, as far as I'm aware is for information that isn't in the broad knowledge arena or for something that isn't widely discussed in the major texts of a subject - every book that deals with the Irish Civil war deals with the makeup of the Free State army, hence why providing a source is un-necessary. In fact, its so easily looked up by anyone who knows anything of the subject that it doesn't require a citation. A citation would, for example, be needed if somone claimed that Collins ordered the assassination of Sir Henry Wilson (Which is disputed by most historians), but would not, for example, be needed to assert that the Easter Rising happened in 1916, or that Countess Markievicz occupied St. Stephens Green during the Easter Rising or the Roger Casement was captured by the British etc. etc.

This point was not dealt with, instead I was barraged with wiki policy, and no attempt to discuss this was ever made.

Can you now see that the policy you mention does not apply to the case at hand (Which I've been trying to tell you) And also, just for the record, I have provided a source, just don't believe that a citation is needed on the article. If we started doing this we would be offering citations for every line in the Michael Collins article for Christs' sake. NewIreland2009 (talk) 23:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is simple the policy applies in all cases you can't pick and choose when it should be implemented. An editor from Outer Mongolia might not have any books on Collins or the Free State Army and all editors must be catered for with regarding to verifiable and reliably sourced text. BigDunc^Talk 10:04, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. You didn't listen to a word I typed. Can you not see that there are clearly times when the policy isn't implemented? Are you citing what your typing now? If you actually thought about what you typed just there, you'd realise its a self contradictory statement - 'the policy applies at all times' - it very clearly doesn't. Which is why widely known facts don't get cited all the time. I'm guessing your one of these policy wonks so I'm just going to leave it at this - I'm sure your knowledge of wiki law will put me to shame!! NewIreland2009 (talk) 11:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will not be repling to you on this matter anymore, if you want to ignore policy so be it end of. BigDunc^Talk 12:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the tesseract keeps moving...feeeeeeeling sleeeeeeeeeeepy...

wotcha bigdunc, listening to 'all that glitters' - death in vegas as i type, zen working well, ended up using my pop's xp laptop to install the drivers & media s/w, then used a flash drive to transfer the music files from my laptop to it. have started installing a virtual machine on my laptop, so that i don't need to keep borrowing my pop's - aaahhh have just floated into some jazz (nich)...Perry-mankster (talk) 19:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy days mate enjoy. BigDunc^Talk 01:49, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stem cell controversy

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. Please quote the specific text I wrote which you feel is personal opinion,-65.189.247.6 (talk) 19:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deliberate destruction of a human fetus is murder. BigDunc^Talk 20:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The actual quote was "It asserts that the deliberate destruction of a human fetus is murder.". "It", in this case, clearly referring to the Roman Catholic Church. Please don't falsely represent what I write by creatively cherry picking through my edits. Cutting and pasting bits and pieces of sentences doesn't represent you the way, I suspect, you want to be represented.-65.189.247.6 (talk) 22:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What you added was in breach of WP:NPOV. BigDunc^Talk 09:34, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV isn't acheived by removing information.-65.189.247.6 (talk) 11:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]