![]() | This page 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. |
![]() |
You did it again! |
Another round of congratulations are in order for all the work you did in making Theobald of Bec a Featured Article! Thank you; your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell ( talk) |
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 23:48, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough- Point taken Plucas58 ( talk) 14:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Ealdgyth, I was wondering if you could take a look at Darius the Great and tell me any improvements that should be made before this is nominated at FAC? Thanks, warrior 4321 12:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
I see you have a copy of Gransden's Historical Writing in England c. 550 - c. 1307; can you tell me if it would be any use for the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle article? I found it while googling for Waverley annals, which doesn't have an article yet; it looks thorough but since it's 1974 I wondered if it was starting to age a bit. Would you recommend it? Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 18:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
The problem you may be having with sources could be due to the fact that apparently the dark ages did not exist. Adding an extra 300 years was all a mistake in the dates. I mention this because it is currently my favourite conspiracy theory. Little green men are very dull by comparison. Fainites barley scribs 22:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to vent a little here if I may. It seems to me that reviewers are now being blamed for copyright violations/plagiarism rather than the editors who introduced it. Nobody can check everything, or should be expected to. The article that's got my goat is Rochdale Town Hall if you care to take a look. Malleus Fatuorum 01:47, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello Ealdgyth! There's been quite a lot of work in the article over the past couple of weeks, and I think your comments have been largely addressed. Could you re-check it? Thanks a lot! Constantine ✍ 10:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
... in your world, maybe. Long live the MLA! On another note, while I haven't checked the journal articles yet, I don't think there's a lot more to The Death of King Edgar. Even a DYK is probably out of reach, haha. Drmies ( talk) 03:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Could you control wether category "History" of the article "Dolmabahçe Palace" has been written correctly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustafa Bakacak ( talk • contribs) 08:48, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
With all respect, I found your wholesale deletion of my brief section summarising the nature and order of battle of the French cavalry in 1914 on the grounds that it was too detailed, a little puzzling - since much more lengthy passages remain in the article covering individual mounted clashes or other isolated topics. My purpose was simply to record that France had fielded a major mounted force of a very traditional nature during 1914-18. Buistr ( talk) 11:18, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 01:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Miss Meyers. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I've been looking over my edits (and the page history) and I have to stand by my decision to call users to talk discussion. Edit warring is present when a dispute is ongoing, and all the discussion is in talk summaries. This was clearly the case here.
You are experienced enough to know the cycle is BRD, not BRRRBR but never D. When I noticed the exchange, I went to talk to read the discussion, low and behold, vastly experienced editors were actually engaged in editwarring with relative newbies for a couple of days, yet hadn't availed themselves of talkpage discussion. This is what I was thinking when I interjected.
To my view, my mistake was to mention editors by name. For that I apologize. I was wrong. Plus, other editors were and are involved, so by pointing out just two, it might have seemed like I was acting like the police, and taking sides. Exactly the opposite of my intention, and again, I acknowledge my error. If I can ever make it right, I'll offer. BusterD ( talk) 01:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
A very civil and polite conversation going on about the copyright status of an image here: here and here. I honestly don't know the answer and the other person makes a compelling case, but I wonder what would happen at FA if this arose. Feel free to offer your thoughts, but no obligation to do so. (And the discourse IS very civil) Someone very helpfully added the image to a new article I just created Albert, Alfred and Chris Schlechten, and I was concerned that it is not a free image (it got uploaded to Commons) but see the conversation. If you have a view that is helpful, that would be terrific. Montanabw (talk) 22:38, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello! I was very excited to see that you'll be able to come to the Backstage Pass! This is your friendly reminder that the Backstage Pass & Edit-a-Thon is this coming Saturday, August 20th. Please confirm, either here or on my talk page, that you and your guest will be attending.
We ask that you meet us outside of the Welcome Center Security Office between 9:45 and 10:00am. Come down the ramp and make a sharp left towards the security office. You will be asked to check in prior to starting the day. If you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Looking forward to seeing you! LoriLee ( talk) 15:20, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Jersey Act. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 02:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 02:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I've offered to talk Corusant through making a referenced change to the Edward III page using Mortimer's book as a source (its online). He seems keen to make a difference, but I don't think he understands how to do the referencing yet, so perhaps that will help. Hchc2009 ( talk) 06:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 03:47, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on August 30, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 30, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 ( talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 ( talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch. ™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Hemming's Cartulary is a manuscript cartulary, or collection or charters and other land records, collected by a monk named Hemming around the time of the Norman Conquest of England. The manuscript comprises two separate cartularies that were made at different times and were later bound together. The first section, traditionally titled the Liber Wigorniensis, is a collection of charters and other land records, most of which are organized geographically. The second section, Hemming's Cartulary proper, combines charters and other land records with a narrative of deprivation of property by the church of Worcester. The two works are bound together in one surviving manuscript, the earliest surviving cartulary from medieval England. A major theme is the losses suffered by Worcester at the hands of royal officials and local landowners. Included amongst the despoilers are kings such as Cnut and William the Conqueror, and nobles such as Eadric Streona and Urse d'Abetot. Also included are accounts of lawsuits waged by the Worcester monks in an effort to regain their lost lands. The two sections of the cartulary were first printed in 1723. The original manuscript was slightly damaged by fire in 1733, and required rebinding. A new printed edition is in production as of 2010. ( more...)
Sorry for not consultating you and other uses before implementing the new tables. My apologies. Scrivener-uki ( talk) 18:36, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Liber Eliensis. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:15, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:15, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Congratulations! |
Thanks for all the work you did in making
Gerard (archbishop of York) a Featured Article! Please accept this barnstar. Your work is much appreciated.
P.S. This is only sort-of a template, really! – Quadell ( talk) 17:59, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
E, would you be interested in giving me a pre-GA review on Russell and Sigurd Varian and John Osborne Varian? I'm half kicking around the "four award" idea on one or both of these (Probably Russell and Sigurd, there's a book about them out there, but can't find much more on John); they are not horse articles, so I'm not all that emotional about them. They were fun to do, you obviously can figure out why I wound up doing these. Montanabw (talk) 22:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know that I am adding Somerset Historical Essays by Armitage Robinson to enWS, as I see that you have cited that work at least in one article. I have a few works from that period added. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:04, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Malleus Fatuorum 22:02, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Think I got all of these? Ealdgyth - Talk 17:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
What is an easter egg link? Rjm at sleepers ( talk) 05:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
We call those fine fellows you photographed a "camp robber." Did you know that nickname? Montanabw (talk) 22:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 13:15, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Talk back D B D 09:12, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
I thought you might know this... Is "horse furniture" a synonym for " horse tack"? I have encountered the term in an old book on uniforms but an on-line search has proved inconclusive. If it is a synonym, I might at least create the redirect. Waltham, The Duke of 13:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Richard Barre. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:40, 16 September 2011 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:40, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 21:04, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Would you mind taking a look at the sources in Hugo Award which is currently at FAC? I'd particularly like your opinion on the websites: timill.co.uk seems unlikely to be a reliable source, though it claims to just transcribe what would be an RS. (Tim Illingworth, who did the transcription, is an old acquaintance of mine, and personally I'm sure he's reliable, but it doesn't seem likely to be an RS by our standards.) Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 23:02, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on September 17, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 17, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 ( talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 ( talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch. ™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:03, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Hubert Walter (c. 1160 – 1205) was an influential royal adviser in the late 12th and early 13th centuries in the positions of chief justiciar of England, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Lord Chancellor. As chancellor, Walter began the keeping of the Charter Roll, a record of all charters issued by the chancery. Walter was not noted for his holiness in life or learning, but historians have judged him one of the most outstanding government ministers in English history. Walter served King Henry II of England in many ways, including diplomatic and judicial efforts. After an unsuccessful candidacy to the see of York, Walter was elected Bishop of Salisbury shortly after the accession of King Henry's son Richard I to the throne of England. Walter accompanied King Richard on the Third Crusade, and was one of the principals involved in raising Richard's ransom after the king was captured in Germany on his return from the Holy Land. As a reward for his faithful service, Walter was selected to become the next Archbishop of Canterbury in 1193. Walter set up a system which was the precursor for the modern justices of the peace. Following Richard's death in 1199, Walter helped assure the elevation of Richard's brother John to the throne.
You got it changed to one of mind ... that's what I get for bragging :( Luckily, I didn't even know it was up. Karanacs ( talk) 17:57, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Dear Ealdgyth I wonder if you or one of the people at WPEQ can help me out with this one: I was writing an article on Daylami and found a ref from his racing days that gave his height as 17 hands. BUT on the website of the stud wher he currently stands, he is listed as a somewhat less impressive 16.1. Is it possible for horses to lose a little as they get older? The horse in question is a 17 year old Tb stallion. Tigerboy1966 ( talk) 18:35, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this list know that it will be appearing as the main page featured list on October 3, 2011. You can view the TFL blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/October 3, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors The Rambling Man ( talk · contribs), Dabomb87 ( talk · contribs) or Giants2008 ( talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch. ™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:07, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
The Gregorian mission was a group of Italian monks and priests sent by Pope Gregory the Great to Britain in the late 6th and early 7th century to convert and Christianize the Anglo-Saxons from their native Anglo-Saxon paganism. Many of the known members became bishops or archbishops, while most of the remainder became abbots. The lone exception is James the Deacon, who never held a higher office than deacon in the church. Among the archbishops were the first five Archbishops of Canterbury: Augustine (statue pictured), Laurence, Mellitus, Justus, and Honorius; all of them were later canonized as saints. Two other missionaries, Paulinus and Romanus, also became bishops. As well as the five archbishops, three other members of the mission are regarded as saints: Peter, James the Deacon, and Paulinus.
Apologies - I thought I'd left a last comment on the FAC!
Other than a bit of disquiet over including the dollar conversions - my concern here isn't that they're wrong as such, just a bit superfluous - I've no objections. I haven't gone over it for anything other than prose style & general coherency, though... Shimgray | talk | 21:35, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to be going to the University of Illinois library to return some books (and pick up new ones, of course) in the next couple of days .. (the returnee books are due Tuesday, so I must go before then). If anyone wants any articles/look ups, please note them here and I'll try to get to them. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:41, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
I really appreciate your being willing to share your own views in this controversial arena. I hope I'm not picking at a festering sore. Until recently, the twin towers site has been like a gaping wound in the NY landscape, IMHO. Riding the PATH train from Jersey into the WTC site has long felt like a coachride into hallowed ground. Now that the memorial is complete and the building is underway, the healing has begun for me. But I know I often see symbols and portents where they never existed (per Wallace Shawn's rebuttal in "My Dinner With Andre"). BusterD ( talk) 13:04, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
It's rude to refactor talk page comments. I understand you may not like it, but it is an effective way to get someone's attention. Toa Nidhiki 05 01:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
There's one thing you don't even half enough credit for: you're an American who's probably done as much for Wikipedia's medieval English history as anyone has ever done. My take on what's been happening over the last few months is that as Wikipedia inevitably moves towards article improvement rather than article creation, unwillingly and reluctantly of course, like everything else that happens here, so Randy from Boise feels he's being ignored. There is one 16-year-old kid that if I had the power to jump out of his computer screen I would definitely give a wake-up call to. Can you guess who that might be? (Oh, and for the purposes of the kiddies-admins who may be reading this, "wake-up call" is neither a legal threat nor a personal attack.) Malleus Fatuorum 23:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
E, if you have a chance will you look over the sources at [ [3]]? I'm having trouble judging consensus on the source choice and wanted another opinion. Karanacs ( talk) 13:42, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For your wonderful and highly professional review on Stephen, King of England's nomination. Good to see that we still have worthy editors around. Regards, Lecen ( talk) 18:41, 27 September 2011 (UTC) |
![]() |
Congratulations! |
Thanks for all the work you did in making Fairfax Harrison a Featured Article! Please accept this barnstar. Your work is much appreciated. – Quadell ( talk) 13:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC) |
Hi Ealdgyth. I've got a question about citing a particular ODNB bio. It says: "Oxford University Press, 2004; online edn, Jan 2008". How should I plug that into template:citation? Should the year parameter be "2004" or "2008", or should it be "year=2008" and "origyear=2004"? I'm confused. How do you do it?-- Brianann MacAmhlaidh ( talk) 06:19, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Victoria! I hope all is well. Do let me know when you're next out this way; it'd be great to have you stop by again (and give you your present :). Having been our first real E-Volunteer, I wanted to be sure to pass this along to you - The Children's Museum of Indianapolis is considering adapting a formal E-Volunteer program and they welcome your opinion as a Wikipedian. Your responses to this E-Volunteer survey will be extremely valuable. The survey will come to a close on October 1st. If you're interested, here are other ways you can help the Children's Museum's Wikipedia project. Thanks so much again for everything! Oh also, did you see the images of Jimmy Wales scanning the carousel QRpedia code and reading your FA? (Be sure to check the whole category!) : )Also there was just a WMF blog post about it today. Will be in touch! LoriLee ( talk) 20:12, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Kim has a possibily good proposal on the Four Foundations AfD page if you want to peek and weigh in. At least I like it. (And given that I'm probably going to have to write some of it, that should count for something! LOL!) Montanabw (talk) 20:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
...Amazon has delivered on Hallam's Capetian France. Will read it over the weekend... Hchc2009 ( talk) 17:31, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Fairfax Harrison. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 15:09, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 15:09, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low
to High
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 03:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
...has been promoted. Very many thanks indeed for all your support and help (and patience) with this article. Am just reading through "New Intepretations of Henry II"... Hchc2009 ( talk) 18:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low
to High
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 06:25, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Irritating/daft question time again:
Malleus Fatuorum 18:31, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
I've had a first look through the whole thing now, but I'd like time to look through it again maybe tomorrow before I say I'm happy with it. For some reason I found it quite a dense read. Malleus Fatuorum 00:15, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
I've been through the article a few times now, and apart from the points above I'm fairly happy with it. On to the next? Malleus Fatuorum 23:50, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
![]() |
You did it again! |
Another round of congratulations are in order for all the work you did in making Theobald of Bec a Featured Article! Thank you; your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell ( talk) |
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 23:48, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough- Point taken Plucas58 ( talk) 14:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Ealdgyth, I was wondering if you could take a look at Darius the Great and tell me any improvements that should be made before this is nominated at FAC? Thanks, warrior 4321 12:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
I see you have a copy of Gransden's Historical Writing in England c. 550 - c. 1307; can you tell me if it would be any use for the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle article? I found it while googling for Waverley annals, which doesn't have an article yet; it looks thorough but since it's 1974 I wondered if it was starting to age a bit. Would you recommend it? Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 18:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
The problem you may be having with sources could be due to the fact that apparently the dark ages did not exist. Adding an extra 300 years was all a mistake in the dates. I mention this because it is currently my favourite conspiracy theory. Little green men are very dull by comparison. Fainites barley scribs 22:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to vent a little here if I may. It seems to me that reviewers are now being blamed for copyright violations/plagiarism rather than the editors who introduced it. Nobody can check everything, or should be expected to. The article that's got my goat is Rochdale Town Hall if you care to take a look. Malleus Fatuorum 01:47, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello Ealdgyth! There's been quite a lot of work in the article over the past couple of weeks, and I think your comments have been largely addressed. Could you re-check it? Thanks a lot! Constantine ✍ 10:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
... in your world, maybe. Long live the MLA! On another note, while I haven't checked the journal articles yet, I don't think there's a lot more to The Death of King Edgar. Even a DYK is probably out of reach, haha. Drmies ( talk) 03:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Could you control wether category "History" of the article "Dolmabahçe Palace" has been written correctly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustafa Bakacak ( talk • contribs) 08:48, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
With all respect, I found your wholesale deletion of my brief section summarising the nature and order of battle of the French cavalry in 1914 on the grounds that it was too detailed, a little puzzling - since much more lengthy passages remain in the article covering individual mounted clashes or other isolated topics. My purpose was simply to record that France had fielded a major mounted force of a very traditional nature during 1914-18. Buistr ( talk) 11:18, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 01:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Miss Meyers. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I've been looking over my edits (and the page history) and I have to stand by my decision to call users to talk discussion. Edit warring is present when a dispute is ongoing, and all the discussion is in talk summaries. This was clearly the case here.
You are experienced enough to know the cycle is BRD, not BRRRBR but never D. When I noticed the exchange, I went to talk to read the discussion, low and behold, vastly experienced editors were actually engaged in editwarring with relative newbies for a couple of days, yet hadn't availed themselves of talkpage discussion. This is what I was thinking when I interjected.
To my view, my mistake was to mention editors by name. For that I apologize. I was wrong. Plus, other editors were and are involved, so by pointing out just two, it might have seemed like I was acting like the police, and taking sides. Exactly the opposite of my intention, and again, I acknowledge my error. If I can ever make it right, I'll offer. BusterD ( talk) 01:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
A very civil and polite conversation going on about the copyright status of an image here: here and here. I honestly don't know the answer and the other person makes a compelling case, but I wonder what would happen at FA if this arose. Feel free to offer your thoughts, but no obligation to do so. (And the discourse IS very civil) Someone very helpfully added the image to a new article I just created Albert, Alfred and Chris Schlechten, and I was concerned that it is not a free image (it got uploaded to Commons) but see the conversation. If you have a view that is helpful, that would be terrific. Montanabw (talk) 22:38, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello! I was very excited to see that you'll be able to come to the Backstage Pass! This is your friendly reminder that the Backstage Pass & Edit-a-Thon is this coming Saturday, August 20th. Please confirm, either here or on my talk page, that you and your guest will be attending.
We ask that you meet us outside of the Welcome Center Security Office between 9:45 and 10:00am. Come down the ramp and make a sharp left towards the security office. You will be asked to check in prior to starting the day. If you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Looking forward to seeing you! LoriLee ( talk) 15:20, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Jersey Act. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 02:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 02:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I've offered to talk Corusant through making a referenced change to the Edward III page using Mortimer's book as a source (its online). He seems keen to make a difference, but I don't think he understands how to do the referencing yet, so perhaps that will help. Hchc2009 ( talk) 06:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 03:47, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on August 30, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 30, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 ( talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 ( talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch. ™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Hemming's Cartulary is a manuscript cartulary, or collection or charters and other land records, collected by a monk named Hemming around the time of the Norman Conquest of England. The manuscript comprises two separate cartularies that were made at different times and were later bound together. The first section, traditionally titled the Liber Wigorniensis, is a collection of charters and other land records, most of which are organized geographically. The second section, Hemming's Cartulary proper, combines charters and other land records with a narrative of deprivation of property by the church of Worcester. The two works are bound together in one surviving manuscript, the earliest surviving cartulary from medieval England. A major theme is the losses suffered by Worcester at the hands of royal officials and local landowners. Included amongst the despoilers are kings such as Cnut and William the Conqueror, and nobles such as Eadric Streona and Urse d'Abetot. Also included are accounts of lawsuits waged by the Worcester monks in an effort to regain their lost lands. The two sections of the cartulary were first printed in 1723. The original manuscript was slightly damaged by fire in 1733, and required rebinding. A new printed edition is in production as of 2010. ( more...)
Sorry for not consultating you and other uses before implementing the new tables. My apologies. Scrivener-uki ( talk) 18:36, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Liber Eliensis. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:15, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:15, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Congratulations! |
Thanks for all the work you did in making
Gerard (archbishop of York) a Featured Article! Please accept this barnstar. Your work is much appreciated.
P.S. This is only sort-of a template, really! – Quadell ( talk) 17:59, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
E, would you be interested in giving me a pre-GA review on Russell and Sigurd Varian and John Osborne Varian? I'm half kicking around the "four award" idea on one or both of these (Probably Russell and Sigurd, there's a book about them out there, but can't find much more on John); they are not horse articles, so I'm not all that emotional about them. They were fun to do, you obviously can figure out why I wound up doing these. Montanabw (talk) 22:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know that I am adding Somerset Historical Essays by Armitage Robinson to enWS, as I see that you have cited that work at least in one article. I have a few works from that period added. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:04, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Malleus Fatuorum 22:02, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Think I got all of these? Ealdgyth - Talk 17:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
What is an easter egg link? Rjm at sleepers ( talk) 05:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
We call those fine fellows you photographed a "camp robber." Did you know that nickname? Montanabw (talk) 22:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 13:15, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Talk back D B D 09:12, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
I thought you might know this... Is "horse furniture" a synonym for " horse tack"? I have encountered the term in an old book on uniforms but an on-line search has proved inconclusive. If it is a synonym, I might at least create the redirect. Waltham, The Duke of 13:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Richard Barre. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:40, 16 September 2011 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:40, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 21:04, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Would you mind taking a look at the sources in Hugo Award which is currently at FAC? I'd particularly like your opinion on the websites: timill.co.uk seems unlikely to be a reliable source, though it claims to just transcribe what would be an RS. (Tim Illingworth, who did the transcription, is an old acquaintance of mine, and personally I'm sure he's reliable, but it doesn't seem likely to be an RS by our standards.) Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 23:02, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on September 17, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 17, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 ( talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 ( talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch. ™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:03, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Hubert Walter (c. 1160 – 1205) was an influential royal adviser in the late 12th and early 13th centuries in the positions of chief justiciar of England, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Lord Chancellor. As chancellor, Walter began the keeping of the Charter Roll, a record of all charters issued by the chancery. Walter was not noted for his holiness in life or learning, but historians have judged him one of the most outstanding government ministers in English history. Walter served King Henry II of England in many ways, including diplomatic and judicial efforts. After an unsuccessful candidacy to the see of York, Walter was elected Bishop of Salisbury shortly after the accession of King Henry's son Richard I to the throne of England. Walter accompanied King Richard on the Third Crusade, and was one of the principals involved in raising Richard's ransom after the king was captured in Germany on his return from the Holy Land. As a reward for his faithful service, Walter was selected to become the next Archbishop of Canterbury in 1193. Walter set up a system which was the precursor for the modern justices of the peace. Following Richard's death in 1199, Walter helped assure the elevation of Richard's brother John to the throne.
You got it changed to one of mind ... that's what I get for bragging :( Luckily, I didn't even know it was up. Karanacs ( talk) 17:57, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Dear Ealdgyth I wonder if you or one of the people at WPEQ can help me out with this one: I was writing an article on Daylami and found a ref from his racing days that gave his height as 17 hands. BUT on the website of the stud wher he currently stands, he is listed as a somewhat less impressive 16.1. Is it possible for horses to lose a little as they get older? The horse in question is a 17 year old Tb stallion. Tigerboy1966 ( talk) 18:35, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this list know that it will be appearing as the main page featured list on October 3, 2011. You can view the TFL blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/October 3, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors The Rambling Man ( talk · contribs), Dabomb87 ( talk · contribs) or Giants2008 ( talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch. ™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:07, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
The Gregorian mission was a group of Italian monks and priests sent by Pope Gregory the Great to Britain in the late 6th and early 7th century to convert and Christianize the Anglo-Saxons from their native Anglo-Saxon paganism. Many of the known members became bishops or archbishops, while most of the remainder became abbots. The lone exception is James the Deacon, who never held a higher office than deacon in the church. Among the archbishops were the first five Archbishops of Canterbury: Augustine (statue pictured), Laurence, Mellitus, Justus, and Honorius; all of them were later canonized as saints. Two other missionaries, Paulinus and Romanus, also became bishops. As well as the five archbishops, three other members of the mission are regarded as saints: Peter, James the Deacon, and Paulinus.
Apologies - I thought I'd left a last comment on the FAC!
Other than a bit of disquiet over including the dollar conversions - my concern here isn't that they're wrong as such, just a bit superfluous - I've no objections. I haven't gone over it for anything other than prose style & general coherency, though... Shimgray | talk | 21:35, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to be going to the University of Illinois library to return some books (and pick up new ones, of course) in the next couple of days .. (the returnee books are due Tuesday, so I must go before then). If anyone wants any articles/look ups, please note them here and I'll try to get to them. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:41, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
I really appreciate your being willing to share your own views in this controversial arena. I hope I'm not picking at a festering sore. Until recently, the twin towers site has been like a gaping wound in the NY landscape, IMHO. Riding the PATH train from Jersey into the WTC site has long felt like a coachride into hallowed ground. Now that the memorial is complete and the building is underway, the healing has begun for me. But I know I often see symbols and portents where they never existed (per Wallace Shawn's rebuttal in "My Dinner With Andre"). BusterD ( talk) 13:04, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
It's rude to refactor talk page comments. I understand you may not like it, but it is an effective way to get someone's attention. Toa Nidhiki 05 01:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
There's one thing you don't even half enough credit for: you're an American who's probably done as much for Wikipedia's medieval English history as anyone has ever done. My take on what's been happening over the last few months is that as Wikipedia inevitably moves towards article improvement rather than article creation, unwillingly and reluctantly of course, like everything else that happens here, so Randy from Boise feels he's being ignored. There is one 16-year-old kid that if I had the power to jump out of his computer screen I would definitely give a wake-up call to. Can you guess who that might be? (Oh, and for the purposes of the kiddies-admins who may be reading this, "wake-up call" is neither a legal threat nor a personal attack.) Malleus Fatuorum 23:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
E, if you have a chance will you look over the sources at [ [3]]? I'm having trouble judging consensus on the source choice and wanted another opinion. Karanacs ( talk) 13:42, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For your wonderful and highly professional review on Stephen, King of England's nomination. Good to see that we still have worthy editors around. Regards, Lecen ( talk) 18:41, 27 September 2011 (UTC) |
![]() |
Congratulations! |
Thanks for all the work you did in making Fairfax Harrison a Featured Article! Please accept this barnstar. Your work is much appreciated. – Quadell ( talk) 13:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC) |
Hi Ealdgyth. I've got a question about citing a particular ODNB bio. It says: "Oxford University Press, 2004; online edn, Jan 2008". How should I plug that into template:citation? Should the year parameter be "2004" or "2008", or should it be "year=2008" and "origyear=2004"? I'm confused. How do you do it?-- Brianann MacAmhlaidh ( talk) 06:19, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Victoria! I hope all is well. Do let me know when you're next out this way; it'd be great to have you stop by again (and give you your present :). Having been our first real E-Volunteer, I wanted to be sure to pass this along to you - The Children's Museum of Indianapolis is considering adapting a formal E-Volunteer program and they welcome your opinion as a Wikipedian. Your responses to this E-Volunteer survey will be extremely valuable. The survey will come to a close on October 1st. If you're interested, here are other ways you can help the Children's Museum's Wikipedia project. Thanks so much again for everything! Oh also, did you see the images of Jimmy Wales scanning the carousel QRpedia code and reading your FA? (Be sure to check the whole category!) : )Also there was just a WMF blog post about it today. Will be in touch! LoriLee ( talk) 20:12, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Kim has a possibily good proposal on the Four Foundations AfD page if you want to peek and weigh in. At least I like it. (And given that I'm probably going to have to write some of it, that should count for something! LOL!) Montanabw (talk) 20:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
...Amazon has delivered on Hallam's Capetian France. Will read it over the weekend... Hchc2009 ( talk) 17:31, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Fairfax Harrison. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 15:09, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 15:09, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low
to High
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 03:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
...has been promoted. Very many thanks indeed for all your support and help (and patience) with this article. Am just reading through "New Intepretations of Henry II"... Hchc2009 ( talk) 18:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low
to High
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 06:25, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Irritating/daft question time again:
Malleus Fatuorum 18:31, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
I've had a first look through the whole thing now, but I'd like time to look through it again maybe tomorrow before I say I'm happy with it. For some reason I found it quite a dense read. Malleus Fatuorum 00:15, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
I've been through the article a few times now, and apart from the points above I'm fairly happy with it. On to the next? Malleus Fatuorum 23:50, 9 October 2011 (UTC)