User talk:Ainenim

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Ainenim, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! RashersTierney (talk) 12:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October 2011[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. RashersTierney (talk) 13:00, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! You seem to have some difficulty referencing (and adding edit summaries). If I can be of any help, you can drop me a line here. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 21:40, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Ainenim. You have new messages at RashersTierney's talk page.
Message added 21:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

RashersTierney (talk) 21:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

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 could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address 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. --SineBot (talk) 22:11, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Balgriffin has been reverted.
Your edit here to Balgriffin was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://goireland.about.com/od/dublinschurches/gr/st_doolaghs_dub.htm) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 23:39, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry too much about the above. The bot mistook your attempt to ref as an external link. I've since re-applied it as a correctly formatted reference. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 11:23, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Rashers Ainenim (talk) 16:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Communication with other editors[edit]

Disagreements are part and parcel of editing on Wikipedia, This is not a bad thing. If you find yourself coming into disagreement with other editors, the best move is usually to have a discussion with them. This is usually done by taking a break in editing from the article in question to seek resolution. If you want to contact one or more editors for constructive discussion on one particular article, this is best done on the article Talk Page (every article has one]. If you are in conflict with one editor over a range of articles, they may be contacted on their Talk Page, (just as you have left notes on mine). Keep all discussions as friendly as possible, assuming good faith. For editors who have previously edited extensively on an article, it can be very frustrating to see change after change with no indication of the nature of each edit. This is why it is so important to always leave an edit summary; it takes only a moment. I'll open a discussion topic at Talk:Balgriffin: hopefully others with a view will notice, and disagreements over recent content changes can be resolved there in an amicable manner. Please take some time to read the links I've left, particularly at the 'welcome' section above.

If you would like to 'introduce' yourself to the community, you can leave some basic info regarding your Wikipedia interests on your User Page. Better not to write a full CV, keep it general - (look around at the approach taken by several established eds). Also see Wikipedia:User pages for guidelines. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 09:17, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another welcome[edit]

Hi Ainenim! I see we have edited the same articles in recent days - at least Balgriffin a day or two back, and again today, and Clongriffin today. Very welcome, great to have a new interested editor aboard. I'll be in touch later with more feedback, but please take all edits as constructive, and if any edit motivation unclear (I try with edit comments - very welcome), please ask. SeoR (talk) 10:39, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, back again, had a look over your very impressive amount of recent editing (it took a while!). You clearly have great energy, and interest in the topics, and at the same time, it appears you have encountered a few other editors with active interests, and maybe opinions - we do try to manage these, but we all come from positions on some matters (in your case, it seems, for example, that there is a question about the status of the new Clongriffin area, which for me has shades of talks past around Dollymount - a part of Clontarf but also a small area with its own identity, or Perrystown, or Ballygall, or Edenmore, all of which have generated debate here).

I would strongly recommend, as RT has above, the use of a short edit note after each edit (it only takes a second, and helps other editors, who may be monitoring hundreds of articles, understand your action and its context).

Beyond that, it's about familiarity with conventions (Wikipedia is very free, but has a plethora of policies and guidelines) - this affects, for example, how we show the link to Ireland as a country, or lists of bus routes or shops - and fact-checking (the rivers in Balgriffin go to Baldoyle Bay, not Bayside, because of which I see a reference to a church in Kilbarrack was removed, while Grange Abbey was never in fact an abbey, the lands there belonging to the great abbey on whose site Trinity College now stands).

I like very much your stated intentions re. knowledge-sharing, and your commitment to the area, and look forward to your further contributions. If you have not yet had a chance to review policies and other community content, I can give some pointers, but you have probably garnered at least locations from RT above. SeoR (talk) 11:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU KINDLY

Hello SeoR (& Rashers), I am Ainenin and I thank you for the messages that you left me. Yes, I am new to Wiki, having signed up only last week. I very much appreciate your help.

To introduce myself, I am female, grew up in North East Dublin, and came to the site for educational purposes. My intention has been to create a BALDOYLE Bay site but first I have to rise to the challenge of learning the technicalities of the Wiki system.

Also, as you both know, I have been abused for updating and further opening the Clongriffin site.

I admit that I arrived in almost complete ignorance. Upon my arrival, the Clongriffin site was out of date by at least six months, it was full of speculation and subjective opinion, vastly un-referenced, and looked more like a blog than a Wiki site. It seemed to be abandoned and I thought it was as good as any other place to cut my teeth, so I proceeded to clean it up. (I now live in Clongriffin and my neighbour gave me a hand setting up on Wiki. I currently have neighbours who are from the outside Dublin and/or Ireland. Most of them don't even know Grange Abbey exists or that they can walk out to the estuary from the train station so I thought it would be a nice way to thank them for their help by posting that sort of info first.)

I am sorry that I upset people. Rashers has kindly sent me instructions for writing an open apology. I have not done that yet because I have been busy the last few days and to be honest, I was so upset by the nastiness that I actually lost sleep. There are clearly angry and ignorant people lurking about on the Clongriffin site. I am not interested in fighting blindly on the internet.

To clarify, I don't know if you can tell what I was up to step-by-step, but essentially I cleaned up the civic information, updated the facilities etc, and then grappled with extensive tagging and referencing in the natural geographic and history section. As I said, while I was working away, I thought I was in an empty, abandoned space. I had no idea that I was being watched and criticised. If I had known that (a) I probably would have worked more offline, (b) I would have introduced myself properly so as not to offend those who had opened the site before me, and (c) had I known that Wiki harbours ignorami, I wouldn't have bothered because I don't appreciate being slagged off and abused, especially when my intentions are altruistic.

RashersTierny thankfully has been very kind and generous. I thought he approached me because I triggered a need for some technical assistance but I actually now understand that is a gentleperson. I am most grateful.

Following the Wiki abuse that I took, I have questioned if I should carry on or not. But this is not a vanity project. I am an educator and I still want the children to learn about the estuary, the bay, the local rivers, streams, wells, birds, nature, etc, and I find now that I can’t resist but want to fill in the history sections for them too.

Ultimately, I cannot go on without further assistance. I can’t yet open new information pages, comment on what I’ve done, or bear being abused on-line. I can quickly learn the technicalities but I’m afraid that I might never be able to suffer fools gladly.

Opening Wiki Pages: If either or both of you are interested, I would very much appreciate if either of you would open BALDOYLE Bay, BALDOYLE Estuary and Grange Abbey pages for me, or should I say, the local children and curious or interested adults.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_abbeys_and_priories_in_Ireland#County_Dublin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Special_Areas_of_Conservation_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland#Dublin

Polite Notices: I admit that I got completely distracted by Grange Abbey, and then I got carried away with St Samson. I have updated the history on Balgriffin and also added a small bit of info and some references to the Samson of Dol site. I would like to let the original authors know that my intentions are respectful and that my additions are there to enhance the site. I need to learn how to do that.

Clongriffin Open Page: Even though they didn’t have to barge in, kicking sand around and being so rude and mean about the work that I put in (which took hours of my time), in self defence I referenced nearly every sentence I wrote, tagging extensively as I went along. I stress that I thought I was working quietly in a forgotten corner or else I would have fully referenced every sentence straight away.

I am sorry that I upset people … Some points they made had some merit but I remind you that I simply hadn’t finished the work.

For example, Clongriffin is not a town, but it is a residential area in its own right. I’ve got the referencing and can apply it.

Clongriffin is no more ‘North Donaghmede’ than it is ‘South Portmarnock’. This is ridiculous inverted snobbery. I might not have learned the technicalities of Wiki yet, but I do know academics and I have the references for this too.

Wiki does not approve of individuals using the site as a blog. All information should be tagged and referenced appropriately. I can do that if you like but if it results in other locals hurling insults at me ... Would either of you like to discuss this further?

Historical Sites/Grange Abbey: As a local with a great interest in early medieval history, I thought I clearly emphasised that Grange Abbey was more of a granary than an actual Abbey. Times have changed. Nowadays, some of us are more impressed by fantastic architectural delights such as the new Father Collins Park and Dundrum Shopping Centre than we are by substance and sound engineering. Nevertheless, the Grange monastic site was a priory and of profound importance. It deserves to be acknowledged as much as, let’s say, Tintern Abbey.

It seems that there are thugs on site who think I am trying to "dolly" things up. I am not trying to gild the lily but it at the same time, I don't want to overlook such a significant site. It deserves better treatment. Personally, I believe it should be restored. King Henry VIII did huge damage when he invaded. It is amazing that the original chapel still stands.

Perhaps by the time you saw it, someone had gone in and fiddled with it. (I noticed that some wording was changed and clearly before the references were actually read.) I would like to further expand. In the 11th century, Grange Abbey was founded, but that does not clarify the age of the site. I was planning on expanding that. How do you feel about this? Am I supposed to be asking for permission? I’d like to know, thank you. If SeoR is interested in this area, I’d be very happy to discuss it further. Also, I’d like to fill in the history of Donaghmede, St Donagh’s well and river (which mark Donaghmede, not Donaghmede-South), his apiaries and how he became infamous for delicious mead. However, if the ‘North/South’ Donaghmede brigade want to shout me down and abuse them I’ll either want to turn off my computer and lick my wounds or else I’ll get annoyed and I’ll want to report them. Like I said, I don’t want to be arguing with anyone so perhaps it is best to leave well enough alone.

How do either of you, especially SeoR, feel about this?

If you are interested in the educational side of things, then I would be entirely grateful to you for technical assistance and some etiquette training so that I don’t offend anyone else.Ainenim (talk) 11:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ainenim, good to hear back, and once again welcome. I will try to answer down here, as "threaded answering" can get messy in this format. Very glad you're still up for this - the first period can be the hardest, as with any new community - I see you also posted to my Talk page, and up top there you will see I had a similar start, having made some, as I saw it, obviously good changes, and had them reverted.

At a personal level, I am sorry if any of my modest edits have confused. Sometimes those of us who have been around a while may seem to be acting rather fast, or commenting rather briefly - that is not meant to be curt, it's just practice and limited time. I also have many memories of working into the night. Hard, but so satisfying when an article goes well.

On the basics - no permission requirement exists! But where a page has a lot of history (even if quiet for a while) or might remotely be controversial, best to raise a flag on the article's Talk page. While "ownership" of articles is greatly discouraged, it does happen in people's heads.

Secondly, on edit comments, of course it is proportionate, and you should not overdo. But almost never should there be an uncommented edit - what you can do is make a point in continuation of a previous edit.

Third, when you want to do comprehensive editing, by far the best mechanism is your personal Sandbox, where you can make and perfect a shadow article, invite comment, and then when ready simply replace the previous version. I will provide more on this topic below - I think it will be ideal for what you wish to do.

It does look like the Clongriffin issue is a bit "hot" - the Donaghmede issue may be in part because that area was itself carved out, mostly from Baldoyle. Regular and inverted snobbery do follow - when I was growing up, for example, half of Donaghmede was "in Raheny" postally, and half of Bayside was "in Sutton." Now people take pride in those areas, but it can take time. From what you say, it sounds like Clongriffin has matured rapidly, perhaps helped by adversity. Great.

What I would suggest is to craft a new lede paragraph which handles this, along the lines of "Clongriffin is a new Dublin locality formed "north of Donaghmede", or "from northern Donaghmede" - acknowledge the past (Fr Collins Park is very symbolically Donaghmede, and when Clongriffin was planned, it was with a Donaghmede address) but mark a new dawn, with all north of Grange now perhaps become Clongriffin? As you say, not as a new town, but a new district - just as Donaghmede was 40 years ago. Some areas never do seem to become "independent" - Edenmore and Dollymount, say - and some do from the get-go.

Got to return to work now, coffee over, but will comment further later. All best, SeoR (talk) 13:24, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again SeoR, Thank you so much for your message, it was received most gratefully. I appreciate that you understood what I was talking about. I am encouraged by your comments and so would like to carry on. Yesterday, I received messages from you and RashersTierny and I took some time to think things through. I think the reason Clongriffin is particularly 'hot' on Wiki is because when it was first built, very quickly a 'Beaupark' forum page was set up on the internet. It took very little time for the forum to become ugly and nasty. Ultimately, that site was closed and the new 'Clongriffin' forum site is being heavily surveyed and 'cleaned/edited'. I wouldn't be even remotely surprised if the biggest begrudgers on the Clongriffin forum are also the thugs on the Wiki site. As I said, I have the references to back up the Clongriffin Wiki page - especially with the territorial and completely incorrect 'North Donaghmede'. Clongriffin is a stand-alone residential area just like Donaghmede is. Baldoyle is the townland. It's all online and I can tag and reference it. My ultimate plan hasn't changed. I still plan on getting the Baldoyle Bay site up and running. (And sorry, I have a really annoying and bizzare habit of calling Baldoyle Bay, Bayside Bay so I need to be watched on that score ...) I can't be bothered in getting bogged down with nit-picky, tit for tat, is/isn't alterations on the internet. It is just a proper waste of time. However, before I do go back into that Clongriffin site and introduce myself and clear up any misunderstandings about me being a developer, etc, I have three brief questions to ask:

1. One of the insults hurled at me about me having "dolled up" the site and accusations of probably being a "developer". I expect that Wiki doesn't tolerate on-line bullying, open slander or maliciousness. CAN TERRITORIAL BULLIES BE DISABLED OR BANNED?

2. The insulter was bitter because I had deleted OLD pyrite court case information. The case is now CLOSED. It is worthy of comment because it was a landmark case and legislation was altered because of it (for which I had enclosed attachments). DO USERS HAVE THE RIGHT TO PULL OUT CORRECT, TAGGED, REFERENCED, UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION AND REVERT TO INCORRECT INFORMATION? Surely not? What is procedure for dealing with that type of carry on?

Thank you in advance for some advice on the above.

Also, I would like to say that your comments on my work were very kind and uplifting for me. Indeed, I was up until the early hours in the morning getting references for St Samson, but I enjoyed it!!! I was relieved that Balgriffin users aren't as aggressive as the Clongriffin ones. It would be nice to transfer some of that information to the St Doulagh site - to let visitors know that St Doulagh is the second patron saint. For me, St Samson was a very interesting character and the beauty of Wiki is that he was already posted on-line (even though there was no mention on his page that he had been to Ireland).

I think you must be the person who added the geographical section and posted information about the rivers and streams? I liked that very much myself.

I would also like to post the rivers and streams of Clongriffin.

Alas, I confide to you that thugs are thugs. There isn't really a big difference in these people from when they are driving around aggressively, breaking road rules and running red lights; or when they are on-line, forcing their incorrect opinions and limited subjective thoughts and opinions down everyone else's throat. It is sad (and an embarassement) that they are my neighbours. I no more want to give them my time and attention on line than I do in person. However, there comes a time when enough is enough. So, even though I'll not be spending much time hanging about on the Clongriffin site, I WILL be putting some details straight. I'd like to know what the boundaries are before I step back in there though.

At the end of the day, it boils down to ignorance and lacking. All children at some point in time find themselves doing a school project on their neighbourhood. Children from, let's say, Howth and Raheny can go on line and find a wealth of interesting information, so much that they have to choose which subject they like most. Children from intellectually impoverished neighbourhoods such as Donaghmede go online and find a cultural wasteland with little other information than what they already know about the local shopping centre. The Donaghmede site doesn't even list off its own parks.

Anyway, I have to finish up now. Again, thank you so much for having taken the time to write to me, to offer me a warm welcome (especially considering how upset I was the other day), thank you for appreciating the additions that I made. I resolve not to make any more alterations without a comment first. I hope I hear from you again. Ainenim (talk) 09:17, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I will begin by finishing the answering of the previous points, and then come back to the above.

On opening pages, happy to help. I suggest that if I create a skeleton for each of Baldoyle Bay (officially there is one bay, Baldoyle, containing two estuaries, those of the Mayne and the Sluice) and Grange Abbey, and then you build fuller articles in your personal sandbox.

The material on the saint was good to see, and I am sure further development will be welcomed by all.

On the behaviour involved, I would suggest letting it go. I think the edits which most offended were anonymous, and therefore may never be traced. I think your statement of position on Clongriffin Talk page does the trick!

As I think I said above, don't wait for permission - dare to edit onwards, for example re. Grange Abbey. And on "I’d like to fill in the history of Donaghmede, St Donagh’s Well and river (which mark Donaghmede, not Donaghmede-South), his apiaries and how he became infamous for delicious mead" - I'd also go right ahead. The little river, the Daunagh Water, has a bit of history, including quite some messing with its course in the 19th century. Don't let concerns about geographic gangs deter! I am happy to assist. SeoR (talk) 19:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And now, to your further words :-) Very interesting re. the Clongriffin forums - of this situation, I had no idea. Strange. But as you say later, thugs are thugs.

Wikipedia is indeed not welcoming of bad behaviour, and sanctions are possible, but due to the nature of the internet, and the limited volunteer capacity, there is also an element of dealing with practicalities, and letting the rest go, unless someone persists. Hopefully most trolls get bored and go away.

"DO USERS HAVE THE RIGHT TO PULL OUT CORRECT, TAGGED, REFERENCED, UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION AND REVERT TO INCORRECT INFORMATION?" The simple answer is "no" - references win. But as above, first line response is just to fix, and maybe again. Multiple reversions will get people into trouble, but most don't push it. I suspect, for example, there will be no further problems over at Clongriffin.

"I think you must be the person who added the geographical section and posted information about the rivers and streams? I liked that very much myself." - well, I did make 1 or 2 edits, clarifying which streams run there. I do enjoy the topic and assembled the fairly comprehensive List of rivers in County Dublin - relying heavily on the two main "collation" books on the topic (I wish local government would remain more aware of such things, in which case our waters, especially the many culverted ones, might be better handled).

I would certainly add a mention of rivers and streams to Clongriffin - the Grange Stream runs just to the south, and the Mayne passes by.

On "...it boils down to ignorance and lacking. All children at some point in time find themselves doing a school project on their neighbourhood. Children from, let's say, Howth and Raheny can go on line and find a wealth of interesting information, so much that they have to choose which subject they like most. Children from intellectually impoverished neighbourhoods such as Donaghmede go online and find a cultural wasteland with little other information than what they already know about the local shopping centre. The Donaghmede site doesn't even list off its own parks." - very interesting to hear a teaching perspective. I must be careful of commenting - some editors from yonder might take offence - but I understand the point.

I will make the starting articles for Baldoyle Bay and Grange Abbey tonight or tomorrow morning, and eagerly await your development of same. Best regards, SeoR (talk) 20:07, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So much for the above - sorry, Ainenim, the next day I was on a business trip to somewhere very remote, and had no connection until a few days ago, on the way back to Ireland. Strange but rather refreshing - it happens with me at times, that's the nature of the job and the current Irish economy - but I did then draft the two articles in my Sandbox - I left them there, in case Sandbox examples are of use - and have now posted them. I hope they are of use as a base for further work. Best of luck, SeoR (talk) 05:55, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

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 could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address 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. --SineBot (talk) 12:07, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]