Talk:Colin Mitchell

message: The article states that he defied the Party (Conservative) whip to vote against Britain's accession to the EEC. However, I'm pretty sure that it was a free vote. Such strange bedfellows as Enoch Powell and Barbara Castle were equally opposed to entry.80.222.132.98 (talk) 20:15, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opposition to Britain's EU entry

message: My statement that the 1967 population of the Crater district of Aden was 700,000 is clearly wrong. Witness one recent article in which it states :
* ".... Aden during its transformation from a derelict village to a city of major commercial and strategic importance, with a population, by the time of independence in 1967, of nearly a quarter of a million"
Thankyou to anonymous contributor at BL for the correction. Izzy 08:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Population of Crater

message: I'd like to nominate Mad Mitch here for GA/Good article status. It's very informative, detailed, referenced and well written. In fact I think the writing quality is noticeably above average for Wiki. I'm not sure why it's rated as "Stub Class" in the biography portal and "B class" in the overall article category, but I think it's clearly a "Good Article."jackbrown 19:35, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  nominate for good article 

message: 1. Prose- Article's introduction needs expansion.  See Wikipedia:Lead section.  Titles need to be in accordance to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles).  Quotes in the text could look more fancy.  Look at other articles like Bill Clinton for quote ideas.  Also, there is some Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid.
2. Verifiable-All facts need to be referenced with footnotes instead of the what is currently the first few lines of the reference section.
3. Coverage- Pass 4. Neutral- Pass 5. Stable- Pass 6. Image- Pass
Good luck.User:calbear22 (talk) 00:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:MOSQUOTE specifically says not to use  (though WP:QUOTE does mention it as a possibility), which is why I changed all the quotes to .  David Underdown (talk) 10:42, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry for the long gap in response time.  I'm going to ask another editor to take a look at it.  You did a good job addressing my citation concerns.User:calbear22 (talk) 22:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My take on this is that WP:MOSQUOTE falls outside the good article criteria, which only include lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and embedded lists.  This leaves quotation style up to the discretion of the editor, which is especially true if MOSQUOTE is contradicted by WP:QUOTE.--jwandersTalk 08:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Quotes do fall under layout which is one of the four you mentioned. Quotes is probably more discretionary. The guidelines under layout for quote aren't specific. I think some special quote marks, especially for some of the long ones, makes the article look better, but I don't think every quote needs it.User:calbear22 (talk) 09:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree.  I didn't put the article on hold because of that.  I'm just not sure.  I'll modify down some of the quotes.User:calbear22 (talk) 09:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi folks, I saw the requst for a second opinion and took a very quick look. Looks like there's been some good review work above, and I think you're on the right track about the quotes...a good discussion to have, but not a direct impact on GA review. But I did notice a couple things about the citations that strike me as a little odd: (1) It seems to me that editors nearly universally put a pretty full citation of newspaper articles, including the headline and author's name in addition to the pub and date. I don't think WP:CITE is part of the GA criteria, but it does cover this topic: Wikipedia:Citing sources#Provide full citations. It would be good to fix this. (2) I suspect Brits are all aware what The Times refers to, but in America and maybe elsewhere it's a more ambiguous name. I'd suggest linking it, at least in the article and in the first citation, and/or calling it The Times of London. (3) This is probably just a style I'm not used to, but the citations I see have the title before the pub name, not after. But that's probably just a style I'm not familiar with, not an error. Anyway, good work, and good luck! -Pete (talk) 03:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: GA review: hold

message: User:Sfan00 IMG. Wikipedia:Copyright includes : 
"Since most recently-created works are copyrighted, almost any Wikipedia article which cites its sources will link to copyrighted material. It is not necessary to obtain the permission of a copyright holder before linking to copyrighted material ..."
So far, so good. 
"However, if you know that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work ..."
Do we know that the Web site is carrying copyvio material?. If you insert an image then you have to establish that it is copyright compliant. But the onus of proof on links is the other way round. If you do not know the status of a link then that is good enough. Izzy (talk) 19:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That doesn't seem to be the way the External Links policy is worded, see WP:EL#Linking to YouTube, Google Video, and similar sites we only link to videos where we are sure the copyright status is OK.  As I recall the video in this article was reproduction of BBC news footage, which is certainly copyright the BBC.  David Underdown (talk) 10:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Everything I have seen policy wise suggests we should err on the side of caution, unless there is a clear release of rights allowing release on to youTube don't link. It is possible for bodies to create official channels on youTube (for example the British Monarchy did so around last Christmas, the Queen's speech was put up on youTube at the same time it was broadcast, and various things relating to unbrodcast footage of the coronation and similar bits and pieces were put up at the same time).  It is not good enough for us to wait for the BBC to object-they have (I hope) better things to do than to monitor youTube all day. David Underdown (talk) 14:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Mad Mitch videos

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=19947. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Did his mother have a first name? It seems a little odd to only say she was a "Glaswegian woman (née Gilmour)". Green Giant (talk) 13:44, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mother 

message: If he is already the primary meaning of Colin Mitchell, do we need his middle name in the title? PatGallacher (talk) 19:07, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. Probably not. Keri (talk) 19:11, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Article title

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Colin Mitchell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080331131155/http://www.halotrust.org/index.html to http://www.halotrust.org/index.html
*Added  tag to http://www.argylls1945to1971.co.uk/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:52, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified