![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
I know it is quite common even in Roman/Greek A/FA articles, but what is the rationale for using primary sources/chronicles or ancient historians as sources? Why are they exempt from the general reccmmendation against relying on them, especically as moedern histroians can read the chronicles and rework them into modern works in conjunction with archaeological material etc. eg, Epaminondas currently on FAR. YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 04:43, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) I"m not sure what the point of the conversation is, though, honestly. I'm not about to go off and work on policy pages, as I've seen entirely too many people get sucked into those and never re-emerge. I think that WP's policy of preferring modern scholarly works can help a bunch with eliminating older histories, but it's not a perfect solution. Let me ask you (as the plural you here, addressed to everyone that's weighed in here) what do you think we SHOULD do about this problem? I get the impression that most of us think it's not a good practice, but what is it that we can do about it? Ealdgyth - Talk 20:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Just a quick note, I'm off to the accountant. It's tax time, and time to go figure out how much Uncle Sam is going to take out of my hide. I'll be back later today. Luckily, I have my papers all gathered, thankfully!
Ealdgyth -
Talk
16:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
There's a talk at WT:WIAFA YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 07:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 07:01, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The 25 DYK Medal | |
Thank you from me for the help and thank you from both the wiki and me for your contributions to DYK. Pleased to see that your efforts are continuing. Well done Victuallers ( talk) 19:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC) |
Note: Ealdgyth's husband and brother in law's article is creditted to the three of us and is the q for dyk fame Victuallers ( talk) 19:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Shubinator ( talk) 19:42, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
I know you're working on an Augustinian mission FT, so I thought I'd pass on something I noticed. I'm working on a list of mss of Bede's Historia, and in going through Plummer I found this comment: "In O3 alone of all MSS. that I have seen there is inserted in the text the musical notation for the antiphon which Augustine and his companions sang on their first approach to Canterbury, i. 25 ad fin."
MS O3 is Laud Misc. 243, which is in the Bodleian. Per this page there is a microfiche facsimile. I know you're working on Augustine and thought you might find this interesting, but I also know this is a bit esoteric and probably not something you would want to use in the articles. Kind of neat, though. I wonder if anyone has actually used the notation to sing the antiphon in the last five hundred years? Mike Christie (talk) 23:00, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
The article Bale Out, which you reviewed for GA, is currently at peer review. Comments would be appreciated at the subpage, Wikipedia:Peer review/Bale Out/archive1. If you are busy with other things or think there isn't much else to be said, no worries, and thanks again for the GA review. (I addressed your concern from the GA review and added citations to the quotations in the lede.) Thank you for your time, Cirt ( talk) 10:13, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello Ealdgyth. A user named Gary King asked me to bring something back to your attention; on March 5, he asked you if this video blog post is a reliable source, and you said probably not ( original conversation here). Well, he recently removed the source (and the information it was sourcing) from its article and I challenged him on the removal. He said it's not reliable because "the person in a video might not necessarily be who they say they are". The blogger in question has done numerous video interviews with established video game voice actors, so why aren't her interviews fair game? The interviewees are definitely who they say they are; they even perform their characters' voices in the videos. So, why exactly aren't the videos reliable? Thanks. - sesuPRIME talk • contribs 06:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Addressed issues in PR. BUC ( talk) 08:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Greetings! The article Electron has been posted for a second peer review. We have tried to address all of the concerns that came up during the first FAC for this article. As you participated in this FAC and did not support the article's promotion to featured status, I would greatly appreciate it if you could take another look and see if your concerns have been addressed. Thank you!— RJH ( talk) 20:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey Ealdgyth, Wronkiew and I have just nominated this article for FA status. Since you peer reviewed it, I thought you might like to know. Reyk YO! 01:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Let me know if I have resolved your concerns.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 05:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for the late reply, but I've finished looking at the sources you noted at Wikipedia:Peer review/Adelaide Rams/archive2, and I would appreciated if you would continue your review. You don't have to, and you don't have to do it right now, I'm certainly not in a hurry, but it would be grateful, thanks, The Windler talk 23:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Hooray on the foal! Congrats, even if it WAS really still the mare who did all the work! (Yeah, I know, you had barn watch, and yes, I AM sympathetic! But still, you didn't just give birth to a 100-pounder! LOL) Must be the time for horse stuff to happen, I sold my little black mare today. Here's hoping your other mare decides that now is a good time. God thing you weren't foaling up here, until two days ago, we had snow on the ground! Montanabw (talk) 00:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I know you're rather busy, but if you have a few spare minutes, I was hoping you could take a look at the Yukon Quest FAC. A reviewer asked that I get another set of eyes to look it over. I think the prose is fine, but (s)he disagrees. Anyway, any help you could provide would be appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 23:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Royal broil 00:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Just wanted to make sure you saw that ChartStats.com, a source you were concerned about during the FAC nomination process, was replaced with a more reliable reference on the Release the Stars article. Wasn't sure if you wanted to strike the comment of concern or at least just know ChrisTheDude was kind enough to find a book source. Feel free to let me know if there is anything else I can do to further improve the article. Thanks! -- Another Believer ( Talk) 02:01, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Nothing much. I liked this [1]. Work on Old St Paul's was presumably continuing, but he doesn't seem to have been conspicuous as a builder. As a Cistercian he was presumably not one to commission illuminated MS. His writings touch on art, but in a conventional manner it seems - [2]. Btw, did you know this page looks very odd in IE? I have to scroll a screen right to see the TOC, which is about 3 words wide. Johnbod ( talk) 16:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Just a quick note to say I've attempted to address your concerns re british-history.co.uk - let me know if this is an acceptable solution for you. Parrot of Doom ( talk) 18:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I took a look at Talk:Phar Lap. It's not the same user, but does seem a bit pushy. I'll do a little more research on some of the edits. - Josette ( talk) 23:06, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm working on a list of Bede's works right now, and Cavila recently let me know that Higham's (Re)-Reading Bede has a list of Bede's recent editions and translations. I saw you have a copy -- is there any chance you can scan those pages for me? If not, I will get it through the library, so no worries if you're too busy. Good luck with the foal watch! Mike Christie (talk) 10:10, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Could you possibly hold off on copyediting the section "Organising the Strasbourg church (1529–1534)" for the moment. I should have a rewrite of this up in the next hour or so, which I've been working on away from the article. It is the stickiest section in my opinion. Do please copyedit that bit afterwards: it's good to see more eyes on the prose. qp10qp ( talk) 16:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Can't get away from those bishops even on main page - congratulations! I'll just keep working up weird sex life for the time being! jimfbleak ( talk) 06:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Galoubet T· C IS THANKFUL AND SPEECHLESS and has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{ subst:smile}} or {{ subst:smile2}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!
Galoubet (
talk)
15:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Why, thank you – I am delighted that St Ælfheah survived his quasi-martyrdom at TFA! I was happy to help given your help at FAC recently, for which I must thank you and bestow the blessings of " Jesus" upon you! Regards, Bencherlite Talk 17:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Ealdgyth, do you have any of these?
If so, and if you wouldn't mind looking a couple of things up in them, please let me know -- I suspect they'll have information about first editions and history of the mss in them that would be nice to add to the Bede works lists. If you don't, no worries; I've ordered the first two from the public library system and we'll see if they show up. Cavila, if you're watching this page, do you have any of these? Seems like you know a lot about this stuff! Mike Christie (talk) 11:49, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks to Dr pda for providing several of the things I was looking for. Most of the articles I've worked on have not attracted other editors, so it's been a real pleasure working on Bede and the related articles -- I'm really enjoying the opportunity to have collaborators. Mike Christie (talk) 11:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay, today at U of I, I checked out copies of 1) Wallace-Hadrill's Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People: A Historical Commentary 2) Connolly's edition of Bede's On the Temple 3) Higham's Convert Kings 4) Campbell's Essays in Anglo-Saxon History which has articles on Bede and 5) Farrell (editor) Bede and Anglo-Saxon England: Papers in honor of the 1300th anniversary of the birth of Bede. In addition, on the Greek front, I checked out Schaps Economic Rigts of Women in Ancient Greece 2) Pomeroy's Families in Classical and Hellenistic Greece 3) Patterson's The Family in Greek History 4) The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Greek Law 5) Just's Women in Athenian Law and Life. Also included are a passel of journal articles which will take a while to sort through. (I also picked up nine other books on more medieval bishops and the like... watch out wiki, I've got new sources!) Speak up now if anyone wants bits and pieces, go ahead and send me an email so I can send stuff out. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks to both Dr pda and Ealdgyth; I've been through all the sources provided and extracted what I can use for List of works by Bede. I will also be able to use much of it for other Bede articles. Thank you! Mike Christie (talk) 13:04, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
First, I hope the rain has stopped, the mare and foal are well and that you have enjoyed some sleep. Second, I don't know if you do modern(ish) archbishops. I am considering the possibility of making Lang a special summer project, but I don't want to tread on your toes by appearing to muscle in on the archbishop thing. Please tell me if you'd rather I left him alone – I haven't done any real work yet. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:09, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
World Arabian Horse Association. New, and probably in need of expansion. Basically, I found the cool chart on German wikipedia and cribbed the rest off of Google translation. Montanabw (talk) 21:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Carl Raswan. This is entirely a translation from German wikipedia and I asked Wandalstouring to review the translation, as all I had was Babelfish and one year of college German and from there had to rephrase things so they made sense, maybe. The article was remarkably extensive, if largely unfootnoted. Take a peek and maybe see if you can find appropriate English language versions of Raswan's books to replace the German language ones that are in there. Montanabw (talk) 05:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your input on the article. I have one comment -- you said "remove outdated reference..." -- NO reference is "outdated" if it is reliable and has not later been proven wrong. Cassius Dio wrote his History way back in 228, yet they are certainly not "outdated" - he wrote accurately about HISTORY. Old books on science could certainly be deemed outdated. Keep up the good work though! Geĸrίtzl ( talk) 23:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ealdgyth - probably a silly question, but is there any reason why you struck out half the comments you had about unresolved issues on the Caversham, New Zealand article but left the other half? As far as I know all of them have been fixed - do they need further work, or is it simply that you haven't had a chance to re-check the others yet? Thanks for your helpful comments at FAC, BTW. Grutness... wha? 00:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, very helpful! I'll chase these down, although it will take me a few days. Best regards, -- Ssilvers ( talk) 15:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for checking the sources. I believe they're all okay and I've explained why...can I get you to follow up? — Zeagler ( talk) 15:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
All done Gary King ( talk) 17:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I have read the expanded section which looks very comprehensive. I have corrected one spelling error. There are some prose glitches and some punctuation problems, which I could fix if you wanted me to, but you might prefer to rely on your loyal copyeditor (whose departure you were bewailing a couple of months back but whom you have obviously lured back with your charms). Brianboulton ( talk) 22:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I think Gilbert's about done now. I'll go through it again in a day or so with a fresher eye to make sure there's nothing I've missed, but that's it. I thought the first paragraph of Early life, which lists Gilbert's relatives, was really awkward, and so I moved quite a bit around there, so you might like to check that I didn't mess up the citations. -- Malleus Fatuorum 15:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I have responded to your FAC comments about the citations. JimmyBlackwing ( talk) 09:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Foal would benefit from one of your wobbly-knee learning to stand newborn photos! Care to share? Montanabw (talk) 02:36, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Any chance you could peer review Checkers speech? Wikipedia:Peer review/Checkers speech/archive1. Thanks.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 20:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
You put this article on one-week hold a month ago. Perhaps it should be failed? Nosleep break my slumber 23:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.
We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 08:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Ealdgyth, sorry I am a bit late to the conversation but I want to know what you think of my response to the discussion your participated in here [3]. NancyHeise talk 20:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on the new baby! My suggestions for improving FAC are here [4] and I responded to your post on Relhistbuf's talk page. [5] NancyHeise talk 22:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
As far as I know the instance you brought up was the only improper use of pp. ... and I fixed the NY Times link, so I believe that addresses your "niggles". :) -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk) 22:31, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
It's a very kind thought to add me as a co-nom, but I really, really, don't think I deserve it. All I did was a bit of prose-hacking. -- Malleus Fatuorum 15:03, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Ealdgyth. I have gone through your comments here and have responded to all of them. Would you please look over my responses and indicate where I have satisfied your concerns and where I have not? Thanks! -- Ssilvers ( talk) 23:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Born last night at 10:30ish central time US - one bay colt with a small star, to be named LTS Right On Time. Mama and baby doing fine. Grandma is tired, but waiting on the vet (nothing scary, just a "checkup", I've never been one of those people that doesn't call the vet until it's an emergency.) Ealdgyth - Talk 12:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
By the way, E, can you pop in again at Talk:Lipizzan. The origins debate is still ongoing. Montanabw (talk) 03:39, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
|
<font=3> Thanks again for your reference checks - Cherry Springs State Park made featured article today! Dincher ( talk) and Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC) |
![]() |
---|
Well in the case of those articles where the author refuses to add citations and wants other people to refrain from adding them, (or other similarand obvious things) the correct verdict is usually rather straightfoward to achieve. It's mainly the few FARs where this is some work and some feet-dragging that needs careful checking, eg Mumbai, there have been a couple of knee-jerk keeps and I was wondering if you could do a sources check. YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 00:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I don't know if you keep FACs on your watchlist (in which case this message would be redundant), but I have replied to your comments on the House FAc. It would be great if you could take another look. Thanks.-- Music 26/ 11 18:06, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Khaled 5 (horse). It's a stub, mostly because I noticed there already was a Khaled (horse) article about the TB. Feel free to tweak! Montanabw (talk) 04:34, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
In Wilfrid, I have been removing some commas. Is OK? Because, there are a number, of them, at the beginning of sentences where, I think, they don't belong. Ning-ning ( talk) 16:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
--( NGG) 17:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Left a message on my talk page. Ning-ning ( talk) 10:42, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
What a monster Wilfrid's turned out to be—the article I mean, not the man. I should have finished with the copyediting in another day or two, but I can see one obvious objection at FAC, and it's the family tree images at thumbnail size. Do you have the technology to make an SVG version? If not, I could do it, but probably not for a few days. -- Malleus Fatuorum 00:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) I've corrected the image, uploaded it to Commons as File:Whitby_Abbey_Wilfrid.jpg. This should have been uploaded as a derivative work, but the interface is too complex... if you can find it, and it's useful suggest you transfer it somewhere before some bugger editor deletes it (as usual). I've forgotten too much...
Ning-ning (
talk)
13:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I've made an svg version of Wulfhere's family tree which is now in Wilfrid's article. If you think that's OK I can do Oswiu as well, probably tomorrow. -- Malleus Fatuorum 18:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
-- Malleus Fatuorum 13:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article
Urse d'Abetot you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 14 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.
Mm40 (
talk)
20:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Have replied on the FAC, but in case you miss it in the huge wall of text – the reason citations for entries on listed buildings always look messy is that there's a specific citation template for Images of England – {{ IoE}} – which is formatted differently to the standard citation templates. (An entry on IoE is considered proof of listing status, so it's far easier to cite to it than to individual local authority records.) As it's a very heavily used template and any change would affect every article that mentions a listed building, I don't want to unilaterally change the formatting; however, I'm reluctant to abandon the template and format the reference longhand as that will stop it from auto-updating if IoE change their directory setup or URL. – iridescent 19:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for helping get
Caversham, New Zealand to Features Article status! The little gold star was added to the top about an hour ago...
Grutness...
wha?
06:48, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
.. questions, too, at Talk:Ralph de Luffa/GA1. Ling.Nut ( talk) 07:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Could you please respond at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rob Pelinka/archive1.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 15:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
User:Ealdgyth,
I got fellow Wikipedians to help me get a
WP:GAN for
The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie.
They asked me to contact you regarding references improvement because I want to nominate it as a
WP:FAC.
Thanx!
ATC .
Talk
22:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I'll do it, if you don't want to. It's just the WP:LEDE, after all. Ling.Nut ( talk) 23:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
(undent) I think I've decided to take on the Investiture Controversy as a long, long term project (perhaps months) for top-to-bottom rewrite. I need a nice quiet backwater, and the topic is an important one... if you wanna jump in any time, please do.. but note that I'm not talking about a concerted drive here; more of a walk or a stroll or even an amble... :-) Ling.Nut ( talk) 03:57, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
The old boy's ready for the road now. -- Malleus Fatuorum 00:09, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Here's another one! – Juliancolton | Talk 21:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 00:56, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 14:22, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
This image, which was removed from Gilbert Foliot as unlicensed, has now been licensed by the V&A. Johnbod ( talk) 21:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
The Battle of Bosworth Field have no bishops or clergy involved (unless you count the church that had handled the burial of the battle's dead), but I would like request for a check on the sources it uses. I would like to bring your attention to the Bibliography: Books; I placed articles/subsections as a second level bullets to the books and wonder if that is " okely dokely do!" or not. Thank you! Jappalang ( talk) 02:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I've made notes on the sources at the picture page and will go back and format it properly tonight or tomorrow. I did notice a couple of slight inconsistencies that I will try to track down tonight. One is that the uncertainty in the dates is whether Oswiu's reign is 655-658 or 656-659; that means that all dates in that set should be marked as uncertain. I will look for more sources on this. The other is that I think I have Alhflaed mis-spelled; checking other articles it seems Ealhflaed is the more common form of her name. Again I will check tonight. Mike Christie (talk) 11:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ealdgyth, I have done a fairly substantial copyedit of BP Pedestrian Bridge and it is at peer review getting ready for FAC, here. Would you mind checking the references as if it were at FAC? If you don't have the time or inclination I understand, but we want to make sure as many issues have been addressed as possible before another FAC run. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello It was suggested that you take a look at Everything That Happens Will Happen Today's references. If you're interested, please assist. If not, that's fine as well. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:41, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey Ealdgyth! Dabomb87 recommended that I ask you to see if the website, http://acharts.us, is reliable. According to http://acharts.us/help#wikipedia, it says that we could use their website for this chart. At first, I thought that they knew about Wikipedia use of sources, and are telling us that the site is reliable. Dabomb87 said though that we need proof that they are reliable (fact-checking, etc). So, would you be willing to check if the site is reliable? It would definitely be appreciated! -- [[ SRE.K.A.L.| L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 22:51, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 14:21, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Victuallers ( talk) 14:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC) 02:22, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Loihi Seamount/archive2. Loihi Seamount, round two. You were involved in the first one; please leave comments on the (hopefully) more active second one. Res Mar 00:17, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 20:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Have you found no usable image of Wilfrid? I'm sure there are some somewhere, even if you have to use 19th century paintings. Just a quick search of the free images at geograph brought up one or two [7] (I've marked page ten as there is a good image there, but not sure if it is actually Wilfrid or some randomer). Cheers, Deacon's sockpuppet ( talk) 01:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Guidance Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for pointing me in the direction of Locus and obtaining those articles for me – I really appreciate all of your help! Awadewit ( talk) 02:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC) |
Bay filly, born 8:30pm Central 30 May 2009. About freaking time. I can finally sleep. Mama and baby doing fine. Pics will be up tomorrow sometime. Ealdgyth - Talk 04:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Ealdgyth, it looks like I accidentally reverted an edit of yours on your talk page; sorry about that. It's a hazard of using the iPhone -- the interface makes it easy to click on the rollback button; I was on the iPhone because I am internetless for a few days (I'm at my local library right now). I tried to undo the edit but there have been conflicting subsequent edits, so all I can do is apologize. Mike Christie (talk) 18:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Congrats on both the new foal and for the new GA, Garrett's Miss Pawhuska, which I just reviewed and passed. There's a handful of minor suggestions on the review page, but nothing that kept me from passing another fine production of the Ealdgyth article factory. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 23:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
You've got a lot happening, don't you! Like your work, including your latest GA nom. I have complated a review on de Bethune. Perhaps a bit more to do than JKBrooks85 is saying re Garrett's Miss Pawhuska, but still a fine effort, and am happy to discuss. Cheers. hamiltonstone ( talk) 10:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Are here. Telling me how cute the kids are definitely earns you brownie points! Ealdgyth - Talk 14:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Blumenthal gets good at around p. 117 or 171 (I forget which). But that's exactly where Google books cuts off. Thanks!! Ling.Nut ( talk) 23:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on the new foal! If you have a moment in the coming weeks, I would appreciate any assistance you could provide in locating sources for the above article. It is a "soft" SF novel. I haven't been able to locate any SF reviews for it yet, but perhaps I am not looking in the correct places! Thanks! Awadewit ( talk) 17:34, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi -- just noticed this; I don't keep my old Locuses any more. I used to have a complete run back to the mid eighties, but no longer. If you ever need anything current, though, let me know. My move seems to be indefinitely prolonged, but I hope to get a mortgage commitment tomorrow and close next week, which means I should have a new permanent address by the end of May. It's complicated by having to go to Florida a lot on business (I'm in Palm Beach right now) and also I have, insanely, just decided to relearn Latin, which seems to be slowing down my wiki-involvement. On Jasper Fforde, a (probably unusable) tidbit: a London bookdealer once sarcastically advertised a first edition of The Eyre Affair as "an extremely rare unsigned copy", claiming that as every other copy was signed, this was a collector's item. Apparently Fforde did a great many signings and so signed firsts are very common. I have a first, but I'm not sure if it's signed or not -- it's in a box in a warehouse in Texas.... Mike Christie (talk) 22:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
I know it is quite common even in Roman/Greek A/FA articles, but what is the rationale for using primary sources/chronicles or ancient historians as sources? Why are they exempt from the general reccmmendation against relying on them, especically as moedern histroians can read the chronicles and rework them into modern works in conjunction with archaeological material etc. eg, Epaminondas currently on FAR. YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 04:43, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) I"m not sure what the point of the conversation is, though, honestly. I'm not about to go off and work on policy pages, as I've seen entirely too many people get sucked into those and never re-emerge. I think that WP's policy of preferring modern scholarly works can help a bunch with eliminating older histories, but it's not a perfect solution. Let me ask you (as the plural you here, addressed to everyone that's weighed in here) what do you think we SHOULD do about this problem? I get the impression that most of us think it's not a good practice, but what is it that we can do about it? Ealdgyth - Talk 20:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Just a quick note, I'm off to the accountant. It's tax time, and time to go figure out how much Uncle Sam is going to take out of my hide. I'll be back later today. Luckily, I have my papers all gathered, thankfully!
Ealdgyth -
Talk
16:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
There's a talk at WT:WIAFA YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 07:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 07:01, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The 25 DYK Medal | |
Thank you from me for the help and thank you from both the wiki and me for your contributions to DYK. Pleased to see that your efforts are continuing. Well done Victuallers ( talk) 19:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC) |
Note: Ealdgyth's husband and brother in law's article is creditted to the three of us and is the q for dyk fame Victuallers ( talk) 19:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Shubinator ( talk) 19:42, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
I know you're working on an Augustinian mission FT, so I thought I'd pass on something I noticed. I'm working on a list of mss of Bede's Historia, and in going through Plummer I found this comment: "In O3 alone of all MSS. that I have seen there is inserted in the text the musical notation for the antiphon which Augustine and his companions sang on their first approach to Canterbury, i. 25 ad fin."
MS O3 is Laud Misc. 243, which is in the Bodleian. Per this page there is a microfiche facsimile. I know you're working on Augustine and thought you might find this interesting, but I also know this is a bit esoteric and probably not something you would want to use in the articles. Kind of neat, though. I wonder if anyone has actually used the notation to sing the antiphon in the last five hundred years? Mike Christie (talk) 23:00, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
The article Bale Out, which you reviewed for GA, is currently at peer review. Comments would be appreciated at the subpage, Wikipedia:Peer review/Bale Out/archive1. If you are busy with other things or think there isn't much else to be said, no worries, and thanks again for the GA review. (I addressed your concern from the GA review and added citations to the quotations in the lede.) Thank you for your time, Cirt ( talk) 10:13, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello Ealdgyth. A user named Gary King asked me to bring something back to your attention; on March 5, he asked you if this video blog post is a reliable source, and you said probably not ( original conversation here). Well, he recently removed the source (and the information it was sourcing) from its article and I challenged him on the removal. He said it's not reliable because "the person in a video might not necessarily be who they say they are". The blogger in question has done numerous video interviews with established video game voice actors, so why aren't her interviews fair game? The interviewees are definitely who they say they are; they even perform their characters' voices in the videos. So, why exactly aren't the videos reliable? Thanks. - sesuPRIME talk • contribs 06:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Addressed issues in PR. BUC ( talk) 08:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Greetings! The article Electron has been posted for a second peer review. We have tried to address all of the concerns that came up during the first FAC for this article. As you participated in this FAC and did not support the article's promotion to featured status, I would greatly appreciate it if you could take another look and see if your concerns have been addressed. Thank you!— RJH ( talk) 20:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey Ealdgyth, Wronkiew and I have just nominated this article for FA status. Since you peer reviewed it, I thought you might like to know. Reyk YO! 01:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Let me know if I have resolved your concerns.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 05:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for the late reply, but I've finished looking at the sources you noted at Wikipedia:Peer review/Adelaide Rams/archive2, and I would appreciated if you would continue your review. You don't have to, and you don't have to do it right now, I'm certainly not in a hurry, but it would be grateful, thanks, The Windler talk 23:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Hooray on the foal! Congrats, even if it WAS really still the mare who did all the work! (Yeah, I know, you had barn watch, and yes, I AM sympathetic! But still, you didn't just give birth to a 100-pounder! LOL) Must be the time for horse stuff to happen, I sold my little black mare today. Here's hoping your other mare decides that now is a good time. God thing you weren't foaling up here, until two days ago, we had snow on the ground! Montanabw (talk) 00:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I know you're rather busy, but if you have a few spare minutes, I was hoping you could take a look at the Yukon Quest FAC. A reviewer asked that I get another set of eyes to look it over. I think the prose is fine, but (s)he disagrees. Anyway, any help you could provide would be appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 23:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Royal broil 00:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Just wanted to make sure you saw that ChartStats.com, a source you were concerned about during the FAC nomination process, was replaced with a more reliable reference on the Release the Stars article. Wasn't sure if you wanted to strike the comment of concern or at least just know ChrisTheDude was kind enough to find a book source. Feel free to let me know if there is anything else I can do to further improve the article. Thanks! -- Another Believer ( Talk) 02:01, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Nothing much. I liked this [1]. Work on Old St Paul's was presumably continuing, but he doesn't seem to have been conspicuous as a builder. As a Cistercian he was presumably not one to commission illuminated MS. His writings touch on art, but in a conventional manner it seems - [2]. Btw, did you know this page looks very odd in IE? I have to scroll a screen right to see the TOC, which is about 3 words wide. Johnbod ( talk) 16:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Just a quick note to say I've attempted to address your concerns re british-history.co.uk - let me know if this is an acceptable solution for you. Parrot of Doom ( talk) 18:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I took a look at Talk:Phar Lap. It's not the same user, but does seem a bit pushy. I'll do a little more research on some of the edits. - Josette ( talk) 23:06, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm working on a list of Bede's works right now, and Cavila recently let me know that Higham's (Re)-Reading Bede has a list of Bede's recent editions and translations. I saw you have a copy -- is there any chance you can scan those pages for me? If not, I will get it through the library, so no worries if you're too busy. Good luck with the foal watch! Mike Christie (talk) 10:10, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Could you possibly hold off on copyediting the section "Organising the Strasbourg church (1529–1534)" for the moment. I should have a rewrite of this up in the next hour or so, which I've been working on away from the article. It is the stickiest section in my opinion. Do please copyedit that bit afterwards: it's good to see more eyes on the prose. qp10qp ( talk) 16:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Can't get away from those bishops even on main page - congratulations! I'll just keep working up weird sex life for the time being! jimfbleak ( talk) 06:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Galoubet T· C IS THANKFUL AND SPEECHLESS and has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{ subst:smile}} or {{ subst:smile2}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!
Galoubet (
talk)
15:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Why, thank you – I am delighted that St Ælfheah survived his quasi-martyrdom at TFA! I was happy to help given your help at FAC recently, for which I must thank you and bestow the blessings of " Jesus" upon you! Regards, Bencherlite Talk 17:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Ealdgyth, do you have any of these?
If so, and if you wouldn't mind looking a couple of things up in them, please let me know -- I suspect they'll have information about first editions and history of the mss in them that would be nice to add to the Bede works lists. If you don't, no worries; I've ordered the first two from the public library system and we'll see if they show up. Cavila, if you're watching this page, do you have any of these? Seems like you know a lot about this stuff! Mike Christie (talk) 11:49, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks to Dr pda for providing several of the things I was looking for. Most of the articles I've worked on have not attracted other editors, so it's been a real pleasure working on Bede and the related articles -- I'm really enjoying the opportunity to have collaborators. Mike Christie (talk) 11:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay, today at U of I, I checked out copies of 1) Wallace-Hadrill's Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People: A Historical Commentary 2) Connolly's edition of Bede's On the Temple 3) Higham's Convert Kings 4) Campbell's Essays in Anglo-Saxon History which has articles on Bede and 5) Farrell (editor) Bede and Anglo-Saxon England: Papers in honor of the 1300th anniversary of the birth of Bede. In addition, on the Greek front, I checked out Schaps Economic Rigts of Women in Ancient Greece 2) Pomeroy's Families in Classical and Hellenistic Greece 3) Patterson's The Family in Greek History 4) The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Greek Law 5) Just's Women in Athenian Law and Life. Also included are a passel of journal articles which will take a while to sort through. (I also picked up nine other books on more medieval bishops and the like... watch out wiki, I've got new sources!) Speak up now if anyone wants bits and pieces, go ahead and send me an email so I can send stuff out. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks to both Dr pda and Ealdgyth; I've been through all the sources provided and extracted what I can use for List of works by Bede. I will also be able to use much of it for other Bede articles. Thank you! Mike Christie (talk) 13:04, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
First, I hope the rain has stopped, the mare and foal are well and that you have enjoyed some sleep. Second, I don't know if you do modern(ish) archbishops. I am considering the possibility of making Lang a special summer project, but I don't want to tread on your toes by appearing to muscle in on the archbishop thing. Please tell me if you'd rather I left him alone – I haven't done any real work yet. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:09, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
World Arabian Horse Association. New, and probably in need of expansion. Basically, I found the cool chart on German wikipedia and cribbed the rest off of Google translation. Montanabw (talk) 21:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Carl Raswan. This is entirely a translation from German wikipedia and I asked Wandalstouring to review the translation, as all I had was Babelfish and one year of college German and from there had to rephrase things so they made sense, maybe. The article was remarkably extensive, if largely unfootnoted. Take a peek and maybe see if you can find appropriate English language versions of Raswan's books to replace the German language ones that are in there. Montanabw (talk) 05:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your input on the article. I have one comment -- you said "remove outdated reference..." -- NO reference is "outdated" if it is reliable and has not later been proven wrong. Cassius Dio wrote his History way back in 228, yet they are certainly not "outdated" - he wrote accurately about HISTORY. Old books on science could certainly be deemed outdated. Keep up the good work though! Geĸrίtzl ( talk) 23:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ealdgyth - probably a silly question, but is there any reason why you struck out half the comments you had about unresolved issues on the Caversham, New Zealand article but left the other half? As far as I know all of them have been fixed - do they need further work, or is it simply that you haven't had a chance to re-check the others yet? Thanks for your helpful comments at FAC, BTW. Grutness... wha? 00:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, very helpful! I'll chase these down, although it will take me a few days. Best regards, -- Ssilvers ( talk) 15:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for checking the sources. I believe they're all okay and I've explained why...can I get you to follow up? — Zeagler ( talk) 15:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
All done Gary King ( talk) 17:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I have read the expanded section which looks very comprehensive. I have corrected one spelling error. There are some prose glitches and some punctuation problems, which I could fix if you wanted me to, but you might prefer to rely on your loyal copyeditor (whose departure you were bewailing a couple of months back but whom you have obviously lured back with your charms). Brianboulton ( talk) 22:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I think Gilbert's about done now. I'll go through it again in a day or so with a fresher eye to make sure there's nothing I've missed, but that's it. I thought the first paragraph of Early life, which lists Gilbert's relatives, was really awkward, and so I moved quite a bit around there, so you might like to check that I didn't mess up the citations. -- Malleus Fatuorum 15:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I have responded to your FAC comments about the citations. JimmyBlackwing ( talk) 09:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Foal would benefit from one of your wobbly-knee learning to stand newborn photos! Care to share? Montanabw (talk) 02:36, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Any chance you could peer review Checkers speech? Wikipedia:Peer review/Checkers speech/archive1. Thanks.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 20:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
You put this article on one-week hold a month ago. Perhaps it should be failed? Nosleep break my slumber 23:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.
We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 08:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Ealdgyth, sorry I am a bit late to the conversation but I want to know what you think of my response to the discussion your participated in here [3]. NancyHeise talk 20:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on the new baby! My suggestions for improving FAC are here [4] and I responded to your post on Relhistbuf's talk page. [5] NancyHeise talk 22:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
As far as I know the instance you brought up was the only improper use of pp. ... and I fixed the NY Times link, so I believe that addresses your "niggles". :) -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk) 22:31, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
It's a very kind thought to add me as a co-nom, but I really, really, don't think I deserve it. All I did was a bit of prose-hacking. -- Malleus Fatuorum 15:03, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Ealdgyth. I have gone through your comments here and have responded to all of them. Would you please look over my responses and indicate where I have satisfied your concerns and where I have not? Thanks! -- Ssilvers ( talk) 23:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Born last night at 10:30ish central time US - one bay colt with a small star, to be named LTS Right On Time. Mama and baby doing fine. Grandma is tired, but waiting on the vet (nothing scary, just a "checkup", I've never been one of those people that doesn't call the vet until it's an emergency.) Ealdgyth - Talk 12:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
By the way, E, can you pop in again at Talk:Lipizzan. The origins debate is still ongoing. Montanabw (talk) 03:39, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
|
<font=3> Thanks again for your reference checks - Cherry Springs State Park made featured article today! Dincher ( talk) and Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC) |
![]() |
---|
Well in the case of those articles where the author refuses to add citations and wants other people to refrain from adding them, (or other similarand obvious things) the correct verdict is usually rather straightfoward to achieve. It's mainly the few FARs where this is some work and some feet-dragging that needs careful checking, eg Mumbai, there have been a couple of knee-jerk keeps and I was wondering if you could do a sources check. YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 00:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I don't know if you keep FACs on your watchlist (in which case this message would be redundant), but I have replied to your comments on the House FAc. It would be great if you could take another look. Thanks.-- Music 26/ 11 18:06, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Khaled 5 (horse). It's a stub, mostly because I noticed there already was a Khaled (horse) article about the TB. Feel free to tweak! Montanabw (talk) 04:34, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
In Wilfrid, I have been removing some commas. Is OK? Because, there are a number, of them, at the beginning of sentences where, I think, they don't belong. Ning-ning ( talk) 16:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
--( NGG) 17:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Left a message on my talk page. Ning-ning ( talk) 10:42, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
What a monster Wilfrid's turned out to be—the article I mean, not the man. I should have finished with the copyediting in another day or two, but I can see one obvious objection at FAC, and it's the family tree images at thumbnail size. Do you have the technology to make an SVG version? If not, I could do it, but probably not for a few days. -- Malleus Fatuorum 00:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) I've corrected the image, uploaded it to Commons as File:Whitby_Abbey_Wilfrid.jpg. This should have been uploaded as a derivative work, but the interface is too complex... if you can find it, and it's useful suggest you transfer it somewhere before some bugger editor deletes it (as usual). I've forgotten too much...
Ning-ning (
talk)
13:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I've made an svg version of Wulfhere's family tree which is now in Wilfrid's article. If you think that's OK I can do Oswiu as well, probably tomorrow. -- Malleus Fatuorum 18:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
-- Malleus Fatuorum 13:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article
Urse d'Abetot you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 14 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.
Mm40 (
talk)
20:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Have replied on the FAC, but in case you miss it in the huge wall of text – the reason citations for entries on listed buildings always look messy is that there's a specific citation template for Images of England – {{ IoE}} – which is formatted differently to the standard citation templates. (An entry on IoE is considered proof of listing status, so it's far easier to cite to it than to individual local authority records.) As it's a very heavily used template and any change would affect every article that mentions a listed building, I don't want to unilaterally change the formatting; however, I'm reluctant to abandon the template and format the reference longhand as that will stop it from auto-updating if IoE change their directory setup or URL. – iridescent 19:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for helping get
Caversham, New Zealand to Features Article status! The little gold star was added to the top about an hour ago...
Grutness...
wha?
06:48, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
.. questions, too, at Talk:Ralph de Luffa/GA1. Ling.Nut ( talk) 07:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Could you please respond at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rob Pelinka/archive1.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 15:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
User:Ealdgyth,
I got fellow Wikipedians to help me get a
WP:GAN for
The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie.
They asked me to contact you regarding references improvement because I want to nominate it as a
WP:FAC.
Thanx!
ATC .
Talk
22:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I'll do it, if you don't want to. It's just the WP:LEDE, after all. Ling.Nut ( talk) 23:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
(undent) I think I've decided to take on the Investiture Controversy as a long, long term project (perhaps months) for top-to-bottom rewrite. I need a nice quiet backwater, and the topic is an important one... if you wanna jump in any time, please do.. but note that I'm not talking about a concerted drive here; more of a walk or a stroll or even an amble... :-) Ling.Nut ( talk) 03:57, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
The old boy's ready for the road now. -- Malleus Fatuorum 00:09, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Here's another one! – Juliancolton | Talk 21:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 00:56, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 14:22, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
This image, which was removed from Gilbert Foliot as unlicensed, has now been licensed by the V&A. Johnbod ( talk) 21:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
The Battle of Bosworth Field have no bishops or clergy involved (unless you count the church that had handled the burial of the battle's dead), but I would like request for a check on the sources it uses. I would like to bring your attention to the Bibliography: Books; I placed articles/subsections as a second level bullets to the books and wonder if that is " okely dokely do!" or not. Thank you! Jappalang ( talk) 02:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I've made notes on the sources at the picture page and will go back and format it properly tonight or tomorrow. I did notice a couple of slight inconsistencies that I will try to track down tonight. One is that the uncertainty in the dates is whether Oswiu's reign is 655-658 or 656-659; that means that all dates in that set should be marked as uncertain. I will look for more sources on this. The other is that I think I have Alhflaed mis-spelled; checking other articles it seems Ealhflaed is the more common form of her name. Again I will check tonight. Mike Christie (talk) 11:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ealdgyth, I have done a fairly substantial copyedit of BP Pedestrian Bridge and it is at peer review getting ready for FAC, here. Would you mind checking the references as if it were at FAC? If you don't have the time or inclination I understand, but we want to make sure as many issues have been addressed as possible before another FAC run. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello It was suggested that you take a look at Everything That Happens Will Happen Today's references. If you're interested, please assist. If not, that's fine as well. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:41, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey Ealdgyth! Dabomb87 recommended that I ask you to see if the website, http://acharts.us, is reliable. According to http://acharts.us/help#wikipedia, it says that we could use their website for this chart. At first, I thought that they knew about Wikipedia use of sources, and are telling us that the site is reliable. Dabomb87 said though that we need proof that they are reliable (fact-checking, etc). So, would you be willing to check if the site is reliable? It would definitely be appreciated! -- [[ SRE.K.A.L.| L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 22:51, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 14:21, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Victuallers ( talk) 14:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC) 02:22, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Loihi Seamount/archive2. Loihi Seamount, round two. You were involved in the first one; please leave comments on the (hopefully) more active second one. Res Mar 00:17, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 20:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Have you found no usable image of Wilfrid? I'm sure there are some somewhere, even if you have to use 19th century paintings. Just a quick search of the free images at geograph brought up one or two [7] (I've marked page ten as there is a good image there, but not sure if it is actually Wilfrid or some randomer). Cheers, Deacon's sockpuppet ( talk) 01:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Guidance Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for pointing me in the direction of Locus and obtaining those articles for me – I really appreciate all of your help! Awadewit ( talk) 02:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC) |
Bay filly, born 8:30pm Central 30 May 2009. About freaking time. I can finally sleep. Mama and baby doing fine. Pics will be up tomorrow sometime. Ealdgyth - Talk 04:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Ealdgyth, it looks like I accidentally reverted an edit of yours on your talk page; sorry about that. It's a hazard of using the iPhone -- the interface makes it easy to click on the rollback button; I was on the iPhone because I am internetless for a few days (I'm at my local library right now). I tried to undo the edit but there have been conflicting subsequent edits, so all I can do is apologize. Mike Christie (talk) 18:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Congrats on both the new foal and for the new GA, Garrett's Miss Pawhuska, which I just reviewed and passed. There's a handful of minor suggestions on the review page, but nothing that kept me from passing another fine production of the Ealdgyth article factory. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 23:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
You've got a lot happening, don't you! Like your work, including your latest GA nom. I have complated a review on de Bethune. Perhaps a bit more to do than JKBrooks85 is saying re Garrett's Miss Pawhuska, but still a fine effort, and am happy to discuss. Cheers. hamiltonstone ( talk) 10:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Are here. Telling me how cute the kids are definitely earns you brownie points! Ealdgyth - Talk 14:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Blumenthal gets good at around p. 117 or 171 (I forget which). But that's exactly where Google books cuts off. Thanks!! Ling.Nut ( talk) 23:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on the new foal! If you have a moment in the coming weeks, I would appreciate any assistance you could provide in locating sources for the above article. It is a "soft" SF novel. I haven't been able to locate any SF reviews for it yet, but perhaps I am not looking in the correct places! Thanks! Awadewit ( talk) 17:34, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi -- just noticed this; I don't keep my old Locuses any more. I used to have a complete run back to the mid eighties, but no longer. If you ever need anything current, though, let me know. My move seems to be indefinitely prolonged, but I hope to get a mortgage commitment tomorrow and close next week, which means I should have a new permanent address by the end of May. It's complicated by having to go to Florida a lot on business (I'm in Palm Beach right now) and also I have, insanely, just decided to relearn Latin, which seems to be slowing down my wiki-involvement. On Jasper Fforde, a (probably unusable) tidbit: a London bookdealer once sarcastically advertised a first edition of The Eyre Affair as "an extremely rare unsigned copy", claiming that as every other copy was signed, this was a collector's item. Apparently Fforde did a great many signings and so signed firsts are very common. I have a first, but I'm not sure if it's signed or not -- it's in a box in a warehouse in Texas.... Mike Christie (talk) 22:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)