User talk:AtSwimTwoBirds

Welcome!

Hello, AtSwimTwoBirds, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Blue-Eyes Gold Dragon 11:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on Nuclear Terrorism

Hi - I noticed you participated in the Nuclear Terrorism discussion; would you be willing to weigh in on this discussion? This is the second attempt at an RfC on these issues (the first was here). Thanks, csloat (talk) 19:28, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Irish political parties

Hi there, I noticed in your edit on the Irish National Party, you mention it is still on the Registrar of political parties. I was wondering if that list is available online somewhere? Tx, Snappy (talk) 15:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. It's here: [1] and the document itself is here: [2] My understanding is that the National Party in particular is now known as the Christian Democrats (National Party), and its activities are limited to campaigning at referendums rather than elections. Note also that the register is a bit out of date. Recent issues of Iris Oifigiúil indicate that the Donegal Progressive Party and the PDs have been removed since April. AtSwimTwoBirds (talk) 15:58, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that's great. Snappy (talk) 16:05, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Letterkenny Residents Party

The article Letterkenny Residents Party has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable political party

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Off2riorob (talk) 21:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I don't think the creator is supposed to simply remove the template like that, the instruction of what to were on the template, the reasons that I gave were also on the template, imo it might be better if you reverted and read the template and followed the instructions. Off2riorob (talk) 23:40, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is ok but this is what is written on the template...It is proposed that this article be deleted.

If you can address this concern by improving, copyediting, sourcing, renaming or merging the page, please edit this page and do so. You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason. However please explain why you object to the deletion, either in your edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, it should not be replaced

FYI, the comment on the template was, not notable political party. Off2riorob (talk) 23:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You will note that I followed the instructions on the template that you posted: I objected to deletion and therefore removed the message. This seems perfectly clear to me. I don't have any problem with its being deleted if it's not notable by Wikipedia standards. It's just not clear to me whether this is the case. It would be ridiculous if I were to propose deletion of the old Belgian Socialist Party, say, for non-notability without giving reasons why it were not notable. My understanding is that there are five criteria; it is my opinion that the grounds for notability are strong but I could be convinced otherwise. I will not be convinced by a lack of reasons. AtSwimTwoBirds (talk) 00:12, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss there. I welcome your assertion of notability. Off2riorob (talk)

The article will for sure require some more wikipedia reliable third party sources to support notability..I found this....Some of the more obscure parties on the register for local elections include the Letterkenny Residents Party and the Workers and Unemployed Action Group (South Tipperary). [3] Off2riorob (talk) 00:18, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Letterkenny Residents Party

The article Letterkenny Residents Party has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable political party.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Off2riorob (talk) 13:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

you said you didn't mind, if you want to keep it please go to the talk page and assert notability and provide reliable citations to support you claims. Off2riorob (talk) 14:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Antigua and Barbuda general election header

Template:Antigua and Barbuda general election header has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:31, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering

I noticed you left a comment Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rugby_union#Irish_flag. However I notice you didn't mention OI or OR. Did you consider these when you left your comments? Gnevin (talk) 18:16, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Call for consensus/conclusion to current Ireland rugby union team icon

Hello, I am contacting you because you have been an active participant in the recent discussion on icon to be used for Ireland rugby union. I have tried to summarise the many strands and come to a conclusion based on what I perceive the consensus to be in this section - Summary of Ireland Flag discussion and suggested consensus conclusion. To move the issue to a conclusion I am asking all participants who have signed the discussion to read my summary and comment on the validity of the approach I have advocated, before the issue goes cold. I am keen that the enormous efforts of all contributors results in a tangible conclusion on this occasion.Kwib (talk) 16:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Washington Institute for Near East Policy

Dear AtSwimTwoBirds, Thanks for your input. I have read your thoughts and concerns on Talk:Washington Institute for Near East Policy, as well as that of other editors. I of course had some concerns myself, and I have made a suggestion on the talk page that leaves most of the article the exactly same way, but I have revised some of the issues of contention. What do you think of the suggestion? --Shamir1 (talk) 05:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation note

There has been a request for Cabal mediation on a recent request for comment that you were involved in. If you would like to discuss, please see the case page. Thanks. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 21:20, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clannad Mediation Case

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-02-21/Clannad is closing up, and I have requested final views. Please have a look at the page soon if you are still interested. Thanks. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 01:40, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2011 General Election Infobox edits

If you're going to make edits like that then discuss them on the talk page first. Exiledone (talk) 17:25, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Thanks for getting that info for the local elections, especially for the ones in the 80's and 90's. Exiledone (talk) 18:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:National Party Ireland 1995.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:National Party Ireland 1995.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:37, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Election summary begin two rounds

Template:Election summary begin two rounds has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:24, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Letterkenny Residents Party for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Letterkenny Residents Party is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Letterkenny Residents Party until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Iveagh Gardens (talk) 16:29, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]