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 1 |
Welcome!
Hello, JimKillock, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place ((helpme))
before the question. Again, welcome! Hyacinth (talk) 11:50, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Should British Rubber Producers Research Association be one page or two? It's now Malaysian, and know by a different name.
Criterion | Policy synopsys | Neo-Latin | New Latin | Modern Latin |
---|---|---|---|---|
WP:CRITERIA | Fits the five criteria of "common name", recognisability, naturalness, precision and concision set out below | Fits all criteria | Fits some criteria | Fits few if any criteria |
WP:COMMONNAME | "generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)" | All the major recent studies use the term Neo-Latin, likewise all of the courses and programmes in Universities on the topic.[1][2][3][4][5] A quick look at the sources at the foot of the main page show fourteen books using the term Neo-Latin, for example.[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] | Used in dictionaries along with Neo-Latin.[22] Used in older scientific texts.[23] | Few if any attested recent uses; some dictionary entries[24] |
Attestation: encylopedias | "Other encyclopedias are among the sources that may be helpful in deciding what titles are in an encyclopedic register" | Used in encylopedias for the Renaissance period and Latin-related encylopedias and elsewhere[9][25][26][27][28] | Unknown | Unknown; Early Modern Latin may be used. |
Recognizability | "The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area will recognize." | Used in most recent histories of Latin;[29][30] used in encylopedias as above; used by all research bodies and academic studies as above; should be known to most people "familiar with" the topic. | Should be understood by someone familiar with the topic as an Anglicisation of "Neo-Latin". Recognisable to scientists familar with etymologies. |
Confusing as not used very much. A knowledgeable reader ("familiar with the subject area") could be misled by the name to think Latin 1700 onwards, or contemporary Latin, for instance. |
Naturalness: used to link | "The title is one that … editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles. Such a title usually conveys what the subject is actually called in English." | Vast majority of sources use this term, as do most WP articles. Academics in the field, such as Jürgen Leonhardt, Jozef IJsewijn, Milena Minkova or Terence Tunberg. Pages for authors writing in Latin during the period in question use it, eg Nicholas Hardinge, Jean Salmon Macrin, Jean-Jacques Boissard, Jakob Balde. Most pages citing the origin of terminology typically use it, Languages of Switzerland#Neo-Latin, Interlingua (disambiguation), Tomopteris, Potassium, Diplodocus, Molybdenum, List of Leopolitans, Anabaptism, Subbuteo | Some pages use the term New Latin, mostly for scientific terms where citing dictionary entries, such as Endopterygota, Centipede and Jackdaw | Occassionally used on pages, for word derivations such as Little grebe, Custos rotulorum and Irpinia. Sometimes just as a way to say "a recent coinage", such as Calendula, but as here is often unlinked when the term appears, suggesting it is not associated with a Latin period in the minds of the editors. |
Naturalness: search | "The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for" | The term is not familiar to a wide audience, but is familiar to people with some knowledge of Latin's history | The term is not familiar to a wide audience, the term is not typically used by people familiar with the history of Latin, but may be known to people using scientific terminology | The term is not familiar to a wide audience, but may be searched for, but not necessarily expecting Latin for this period. |
WP:PRECISION | "titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that" | The term is within English (and German, Swedish and Dutch) sources very clear, meaning Latin from Petrarch to present.[31][32] As with any large expansive topic, edges can be blurry and authors can choose parts of the topic to study rather than the whole. This may be perceived as reducing precision, but not in terms of the "scope of the article". Critically Neo-Latin should be understood as a style of Latin within the noted period, overlapping with other styles of adjacent periods. Fuzziness in time and definitions of style is natural, and not an argument for "ambiguity". Most of the time, the variations in usage of the term relate to the relevance of Neo-Latin in different contexts. Neo-Latin styles start and end in different ways in different countries. There is nineteenth century usage and dictionary entries for Neo-Latin languages meaning Romance languages, but this is no longer common and can be dealt with by a hat note as at present. |
Following Neo-Latin, it is equally precise | The topic covers a bit of the medieval period, early modern and properly modern Latin, this seems quite imprecise as a title. It could mean just Latin after 1700, or Contemporary Latin. |
WP:CONCISE | "The title is no longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects" | Concise | Concise | Concise but lacks precision, so does not meet the criterion |
WP:CONSISTENT | "The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles." | Each kind of Latin (based on style or period with blurry dates), ie Classical Latin, Vulgar Latin, Late Latin etc, is given the name used conventionally by Latinists in English, so Neo-Latin meets the criterion. Within pages on the topic, eg: Neo-Latin studies, Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Neo-Latin Studies, the phrase Neo-Latin is used, as this is the commonly accepted title, or part of institutional names. |
Following Neo-Latin, New Latin partially meets the criterion | As the term is not widely used, it does not meet the criterion. |
Other factors | ||||
Objections to the term | Suitability or objective criticism of the term is not a criteria | Neo-Latin can be regarded as implying a 'revival' of the language, as opposed to a 'revival' of Classical standards or liguistic renewal through standardisation. | Similar objections could be made | The term relates to period but the period is not wholly modern |
References
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Tun Abdul Razak Research Centre, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: British Rubber Producers Research Association. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:23, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello, JimKillock/Archive 1, and welcome to WikiProject Worcestershire! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. We're sure your input will be much appreciated and hope you enjoy contributing here and being a Worcestershire Wikipedian. If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page. Finally, remember, be bold with your ideas! |
Hello, JimKillock. Just thought I'd drop you a note to thank you for the work you did in creating the LRG Treloar article. I did a bit of work on it this evening, citing various sources on the web. Since you seem to know something about Professor Treloar, I wondered if you might take a look and make sure it's OK. Best regards – Hebrides (talk) 21:05, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Jim. Thank you for your work on Dodford, Worcestershire. I have reviewed this article and upgraded it from stub to start class. I don't know why I didn't get round to this sooner. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:14, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Jim. Recent discussions here in Malvern have suggested that there may be some minor inaccuracies in this article. One point that has come to light is: At the Royal Radar Establishment, Barnett held a Senior Government Fellowship. He worked on aspects of theoretical solid state physics, that included the properties of organic semiconductors. The question has been raised because no one here, particularly those who were senior research scientists at RRE at the time and involved in semi conductors is aware that the UK government conferred fellowships. This is linked to a source (#12) that is apparently a work that Michael either authored or edited himself. Anything you can do to elucidate, or provide a reliable, independent third-party source for this would be much appreciated. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:54, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi again. Just a nudge. Michael is a valued contributor to the Wikipedia and I would just like to be sure that everything about him is accurate. I've just returned from Malvern where I have had many happy reunions with former RRE employees, and their offspring. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
As you said on my talk page, I am not sure that there is that much more in the way of sources, but I suspect there is room for fleshing out the article in respect of the history and personel of the forest. At present, we have two keepers named, but it should be possible to assemble a longer list. At the core of the forest was the park (in Hanbury parish); it should also be possible to trace its descent and determine the relationship between the forest and the park. Some years ago, Birmingham University undertook a historical survey of Hanbury, which may provide information that could be used, possibly published in the Occasional Papers of Leicester University department of English Local History. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited European Digital Rights, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macedonia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:19, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Category:Access to Knowledge movement, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Talk:Government Communications Headquarters, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. Dodi 8238 (talk) 14:11, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arden, Warwickshire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National forest. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 09:13, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, JimKillock. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello JimKillock,
If you will have a couple minutes, please have a look at brand new Worcestershire Barnstar, created for the Worcestershire Project and, as participant of this Project, please give your support, if you will like it, on the Wikipedia Awards talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wikipedia_Awards Your participation will be highly appreciated. Thank you.
Regards Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 22:53, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
In this edit you copied text from the article Charles I of England into the article Personal Rule without indicating that you had copied the text from the the Charles article. That was a breach of copyright. Please read WP:Copying within Wikipedia. The reason I noticed this was because of the additional problem explained in the section "Other reasons for attributing text". You copied across the text with short citations, but you did not copy across the long citations in the references section that support the short in-line citations. -- PBS (talk) 06:39, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello, JimKillock. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Worcester, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dissolution (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Grafton Manor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harcourt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi there,
Please see the discussion on Worcester. There was reasonable discussion about doing this, and I have already taken out content from the history section of the Worcester page so the content is different. I had planned to be doing further stripping back today. Jim Killock (talk) 11:01, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Apologies about blanking one of your articles! I accidentally clicked rollback while searching for vandalism on recent changes. Since it only takes one click to execute, it wiped everything. It has since been restored! INeedSupport(Care free to give me support?) 06:43, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
How about getting it to GA? It's a almost ready and I've just reassessed it as B, but as a long article there will be a bit to do. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:03, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Jim, you've moved the content on Honeybourne parish churches to sit underneath history. However it actually contains information on both the past and present - there is present tense as well as past tense. Now you wouldn't want to split this - it makes sense to keep information on the churches togeter, but shouldn't the present take precedence? Malevan (talk) 23:01, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks that makes a lot of sense Malevan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:05, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
I am going through the short citations in History of Worcestershire and fixing some of the broken links between the short in-line citations and the long citations in the References section.
I came across a problem with "Dryer 1917" because the short citation was not supported by a long one. On investigation it was clear that the text was copied from either "Bromsgrove" or "St John the Baptist Church, Bromsgrove" articles, further investigation showed that it originated in the "Bromsgrove" article and had been copied into "St John the Baptist Church, Bromsgrove" by you with the appropriate attribution Revision as of 15:59, 1 July 2018. The problem is that when you copied the information into the "History of Worcestershire" you added no comment at all and so no adequate attribution (please read Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Other reasons for attributing text).
Where did the rest of the text that you added with that edit and others come from? Did you write it from scratch or did you copy it from other pages?
While looking for that edit I came across a dating issue with Revision as of 11:00, 14 July 2018, is 2014 a typo for 1214? -- PBS (talk) 12:30, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello, JimKillock. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
JimKillock (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 185.222.26.242 . Place any further information here. IPV6 2a0d:3001:2100:b003:1234::242 - addresses in use by VPN provider F-Secure
Decline reason:
The IP address you give belongs to a webhost; using a webhost or VPN to edit is not permitted, as vandals use them to evade detection and blocking. You will have to use other means to edit. 331dot (talk) 10:08, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the ((unblock)) template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Hi there. Do you remain interested in taking West Midlands Serious Crime Squad through the Good Article process? If so I will pick-up the review but would also want to confirm that you'd have enough availability to complete the review by the end of the month. I might have dramatically less availability to finish a review in 2020. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:00, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article West Midlands Serious Crime Squad you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Barkeep49 -- Barkeep49 (talk) 22:00, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
The article West Midlands Serious Crime Squad you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:West Midlands Serious Crime Squad for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Barkeep49 -- Barkeep49 (talk) 23:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
The article West Midlands Serious Crime Squad you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:West Midlands Serious Crime Squad for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Barkeep49 -- Barkeep49 (talk) 23:01, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Worcestershire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Allen. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Worcestershire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stoke Prior.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Jim, If you see this message and I haven’t replied to your dm sorry. I have seen it but I’m having some problems for some reason I can’t reply. I will continue trying. -Gifnk dlm 2020 If only Middle English Wikipedia could be saved(talk) 18:15, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Worcestershire - one of England's oldest and still existing (with some minor boundary changes) ceremonial and political shires, famous for its nearly 1000 year old cathedral, the River Severn, the AONB of the Malvern Hills, some of the oldest schools in the country, England's fastest growing university, apples, pears, cider and cricket, and of course its world famous sauce. The Wikiproject is now in need of some attention. Created 12 years ago, this project amassed a huge resource for editors working on all kinds of articles and categories related in some way or another to the county. Kudpung is more or less retired from Wikipedia getting on for 2 years ago and it would be good if a group of editors could get it up to date and continue to maintain it.
Opt out of this message list here.
WikiProject Worcestershire 14:14, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi Jim. It's good to see you are still around. I'm largely retired from Wikiedia and I don't think I ever thanked you for writing the article about Michael. He was a significant contributor to Malvern, Worcestershire and I've added that to his article and added him to the list of notable people in the Malvern article. It's highly possible that he knew my Dad who was also a senior scientist at TRE/RRE at the same time. Dad passed away at 96 in 2016 and that was the last time I was able to visit the UK. Having survived 9 weeks in hospital with COVID-19 here in Thailand this year, with its lasting effects I'm not sure now if I will ever be able to visit my home town or Europe again. Stay well. Chris (Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:20, 15 May 2022 (UTC))
Jim, could you please chime in at Talk:Michael P. Barnett? I seem to have opened a can of worms there and invited what I put down to bad faith. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I have a few minor queries on that article. I thought I'd better address them directly to you rather than put them in the article and reveal my ignorance!
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM))
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited New Latin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Latin School.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tunberg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Tunberg.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
I think you could use reading WP:BLUDGEON. Nardog (talk) 07:54, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:New Latin poets indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:52, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
The WORCESTERSHIRE Project Newsletter - May 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
A tag has been placed on Category:New Latin indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:25, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
An article you recently created, List of Neo-Latin authors, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969 TT me 10:37, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello, JimKillock!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Pbritti (talk) 20:28, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
|
The WORCESTERSHIRE Project Newsletter - July 2023 | |||
---|---|---|---|
|
Note that if you are in mobile view you will have to enter desktop view to see the Newsletter.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:52, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
The WORCESTERSHIRE Project Newsletter - September 2023 | ||
---|---|---|
|
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:18, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM))
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Congrats for entering List of Wikipedians by number of edits/5001–10000! Keep up your good work! Timothytyy (talk) 08:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC) |
An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited History of the Jews in England (1066–1290), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Exodus.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 15:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Edgar Samuel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://uclpress.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.14324/111.444.jhs.2023v54.10. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Holbein-tube.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
((Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>))
below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Category:14th-century Neo-Latin writers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 20:34, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Edict of Expulsion you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of UndercoverClassicist -- UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Holbein-tube.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 02:59, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
The article Edict of Expulsion you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Edict of Expulsion for comments about the article, and Talk:Edict of Expulsion/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of UndercoverClassicist -- UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hereford Mappa Mundi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phoenix.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:48, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I am quite low on energy, so please excuse the grogginess. I am compelled to request that you slow down on working on Edward I. There seems to be enormous chunks of text (of dubious factual accuracy) that are uncited and full of typos; those that are cited are formatted improperly. The mechanics and readability of the article are disoriented; I suggest that you make these changes in your sandbox before willy-nilly bombarding a high-visibility article with careless edits. This leads us to an even more contentious issue: the sheer amount of text being added to the article is all in support of a pro-Jewish agenda that seemingly victimizes the Jewish people by creating a dichotomy between them and Edward. As other users, such as @Ealdgyth and @Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, have entreated in the past, this article is not the place to be doing that. It adds undue weight to a niche issue that is seldom discussed in academic scholarship. Wikipedia is not the place to be reevaluating a historical figure's legacy. That is the job of professional scholars, academics, and historians. Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi, in this edit to Edward I of England you introduced ((Harvnb|Richardson|1962|pp=214–6)), but no source "Richardson 1962" is listed. This means that nobody can look the reference up, and adds the article to Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. If you could supply the missing source it would be appreciated. DuncanHill (talk) 22:18, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
No, you don't just pre-empt a discussion you have started and change the first para. Wait for the RM to finish. Johnbod (talk) 04:04, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
I have nominated Edward I of England for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Jim Killock (talk) 21:13, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello JimKillock!
Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Citation Barnstar | ||
This award is given in recognition to JimKillock for collecting more than 1 point during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's FEB24 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing 14,300 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – – DreamRimmer (talk) 17:39, 8 March 2024 (UTC) |
Hello, JimKillock. Thank you for your work on Anglo-Jewish studies. Tacyarg, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Interesting article, thanks.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with ((Re|Tacyarg))
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Tacyarg (talk) 17:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your help at WP:GOCE/REQ, but please don't accept a request unless you intend to finish it; your making several "first passes" doesn't reduce the backlog. All the best, Miniapolis 23:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Category:Neo-Latin writers has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NLeeuw (talk) 06:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello, JimKillock. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Eleanor of Castile at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 04:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |