User talk:Chewings72

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Early dynasty pages[edit]

Hi Chewings72. Nice to get an opportunity to talk to you this way. I'm looking forward to seeing your contributions. As a start, besides Verner who would be a good source for the discussion about Nimaethap, Nebka, Sanakht etc? I think you're right that a more detailed discussion may be in order. The time is complicated and the experts sometimes disagree, but it would be nice to clean up that segment on Wikipedia. Any thoughts? --AnnekeBart (talk) 13:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I am an amateur historian who has only recently decided to get involved in reviewing the articles on Wikipedia dealing with Ancient Egypt.
So I am dependent on the expertise of others on issues such as the likely date that events happened in ancient Egypt and the duration and order of individual Kings' reigns.
I have noticed that some articles use Shaw as the basis of calculating dates, while you make reference to Verner. I have noticed that a site set up by Dariusz Sitek called "Ancient Egypt - History and Chronology" (http://www.narmer.pl/indexen.htm) provides a very thorough bibliography of writers on the various Egyptian dynasties. In this regard, I note that there are variations of up to 100 years in the dates of the reigns for the various pharaohs from the third Dynasty.
What worries me is that various authors of different Wikipedia articles about the early Dynasties in Egypt are quite happily using different dates because they refer to different authors as their primary source(s). So when I was exploring the issue of the order of the pharaohs of the third Dynasty, one of my frustrations was trying to determine which authority (or authorities) was the best.
Therefore, I wonder whether somebody needs to unilaterally make a decision about a particular author to use as the basis for dates and as the basis for the order of the early pharaohs for all the relevant Wikipedai articles, even if that decision is somewhat arbitrary.
Given that I have only recently decided to get involved in looking at the articles in Wikipedia dealing with the early Egyptian Dynasty's, do you know if this issue been dealt with in the past or whether there is a contributor to Wikipedia who is able to help guide this discussion? --Chewings72 (talk) 10:40, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm an amateur historian as well. The problem with the dating is an interesting one. It seems to me that the best we may be able to do is to provide the different dates given by scholars? For the early dynastic and old kingdom periods all they are able to do is estimate and I noticed too that the dates can differ by a century or more. I think for as far as the 3rd dynasty goes, it's not just the dates that are in question. The order of the kings is as well (from what I understand). My impression is that as an online encyclopedia Wikipedia should reflect the different theories. The sources should be listed so that an interested person can investigate further.
I think someone like Dougweller, Alensha or Leoboudv would know more about the history of this issue and if any consensus has been reached about how to deal with it. --AnnekeBart (talk) 13:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I just looked at Wilkinson's book about early dynastic Egypt and there is a very nice discussion by him about the chronology of the 3rd dynasty. The King lists (Abydos, Turin, etc) all give a sequence starting with Nebka, then Djoser etc. The archaeological data contradicts that order however. I hopefully will have some time over the weekend, but maybe the clearest thing to do is to write into the article about the 3rd dynasty something about the issues about the chronology of this list of kings and explain what the problems are. Lehner seems to stick to the order of kings as outlined in the king lists, Verner, Wilkinson, Helck seem to favor a chronology which places Sanakht closer to the end of the dynasty. I think our job is not to choose one interpretation but provide a description of the state of knowledge. And if that includes different interpretations, then that's what should be written into the article. --AnnekeBart (talk) 14:26, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi AnnekeBart. I agree with your views on the best way forward. I had a quick look at the current Wikipedia article on the Third dynasty of Egypt. It currently has a fairly brief discussion about the ordering of the pharaohs and really does not discuss the dates issue. Rather it focusses on using the Shaw dates with a degree of preciseness that belies the challenges of dating any event from the 3rd dynasty. How did your weekend homework go?? --Chewings72 (talk) 11:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Well, I did a first run at the Third dynasty of Egypt article. I need to rework it somewhat, but this at least puts a list of kings with links up there with some explanation of the difficulties inherent in studying this time period. --AnnekeBart (talk) 13:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Chewings72. You have new messages at AnnekeBart's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Biography project talk page revision[edit]

Hi you incorrectly attributed the comments you reverted to me - if you look you will see it was anon user I responded to the previous post Thruxton (talk) 06:14, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I think there is some confusion. I did not revert your contribution regarding Ralph Regenvanu. Nor did my comment imply that you had made the change I reverted. Rather I reverted an inappropriate entry by an anonymous contributer - 212.183.140.23. As the explanation to my action says: "Revert to revision 406891836 dated 2011-01-09 16:15:15 by Thruxton using popups", that is return the section back to the version as updated by Thruxton. You will see that your entry is unaffected by my action. --Chewings72 (talk) 06:36, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Concernings[edit]

If you are concerned about my edits, why don´t you talk with ME about? Or is it common here to talk only behind other´s back obout them??? There´s truely no single reason to mistrust my works just because my sources are not english. disappointed, --Nephiliskos (talk) 03:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, no offence intended. My apologies for not writing to you directly. I was asking a person who has been contributing for quite a while on Egyptian articles for a check of your changes, not criticising your input. I added my comments since you had made your comments there. I think that was reasonable as supported by how quickly you have responded to my comment. The reason for my concern is your references to "Teti II" and other related references that don't seem to have links to any royalty or nobles included in existing Wikipedia articles. --Chewings72 (talk) 04:06, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
I answered at my page. I´m sorry. Greetings; --Nephiliskos (talk) 04:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. All is fine now. All the best with your studies :) Regards --Chewings72 (talk) 04:53, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Djeseretnebti[edit]

Hi. I´m sorry, but according to the Abydos kinglist the direct successor of Djoser (Hor-Netjerichet) is called "Teti", who´s identified with Hor-Sekhemkhet. Egyptologist normally call him "Teti II.", since "Teti I." is the same as "Athotis". The kinglist for the 3rd dyn. is spelled in the Abydos-list as following: Nebka, ...djeser, Teti, Sedjes and Neferkarê. --Nephiliskos (talk) 10:25, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I was using the Wikipedia article on the third dynasty kings which has the order and names of the kings based on Toby A.H. Wilkinson, in his 2001 book "Early Dynastic Egypt". Thus my confusion. Clearly, the name and order of the kings of this period is subject to much speculation and guess work. So please write the article as you think best reflects the evidence. Regards --Chewings72 (talk) 11:40, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Weneg (pharaoh)[edit]

Thx for yer help. ;-) best regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 15:10, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Seth-Peribsen[edit]

Hi there. Srry, I simply had forgotten the refs for the section "Political motivations". They are in now. What do you think of the article as such? best regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 12:43, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi.^^ Thx for your great response. You are like so welcome to my page! I´m always happy if someone helps me out. Yes, as readable at mah homepage, German is my mother-language. The Englisch I learned, differs from what is called "school english" in my country. I´ve learned pub-english thx to a acquaintance who´s British. And, yes, as you already noticed, I have still some problems with "curatorial English". I rlly hope to be able to solve them one day... I´m truely srry, if my articles cause some circumstances, but I rlly don`t know it better yet. I often don`t know how to translate without a lost of meanings and contents hidden in the diction.
I´m a total geek for Early Dynastic Egypt. That´s why I started to write articles in de.Wikipedia. But I also saw the articles here. I´m not up to critisize the works of the authors here, but many articles about early Egyptian kings are in a lamentable state! The next thing is that english literature - as far mah experiences reach - often content too less informations or simply repeat overaged theories. Some few exceptions are Toby a. Wilkinson, Miriam Lichtheim and the page of Francesco Raffaele. In fact, there are more german books and magazines, that are constantly up-to-date. Egyptologists such as Wolfgang Helck, Nicholas Grimal, Thomas Schneider, Silke Roth, Rainer Stadelmann and Hermann Alexander Schlögl are worldwide known for their excellent writing works.
Of course I see the linguistic problems. Many English peoples don`t speak and read German, whilst many Germans don`t have a command of a good Englisch. But in my humble opinion it´s just a question of will and want to cooperate, so that articles with an always up-to-date content can be written and presented. I rlly hope that I can manage to be able to present good works.
With best regards; --Nephiliskos (talk) 08:29, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Senedj[edit]

Mah next "victim". ;-) best regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 15:39, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thou are such a great help! Thx!!!^^ --Nephiliskos (talk) 08:28, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Raneb[edit]

And on we go... :D --Nephiliskos (talk) 12:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Meanwhile I get problems. It looks like mah hieroglyphic boxes are not welcome. --Nephiliskos (talk) 19:08, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Just wanted to thank Chewings72 for doing the copyedit on the Raneb article. Much appreciated! When I have the time I will take a closer look at the edits myself and will see if I can add anything to them. Cheers! Captmondo (talk) 13:27, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Request[edit]

Hi, Chewings72!^^ I wonder if it made sense to discuss the new hiero-boxes I used to present the names of the early kings. I see some problems with the older boxes:

  • No horus-name, no gold-name, no nebtj-name... NOTHING. The old boxes give no useful information, and if so, these informations are redundant, incorrect or incomplete.
  • The old boxes call upon the mommahs and poppahs of the early kings. This is highly problematic, since Egyptologists are pretty unsure about any interfamiliar kinships. Few exception are queen Meritneith and queen Hetep-herj-nebtj (the mom of Djoser). Their names appear on seal impressions, together with their titles declaring them as king´s moms. Yes, I know, the Palermostone calles some king´s mommahs, too. But their identities are questioned, because their names do not appear in the early dynastic tombs.
  • The German boxes I use beat us the opportunity to present all important names of the early kings in words and signs. In german Wikipedia a broad palette of different hiero-boxes also give the chance to even sho titles and rare name forms.

It´s not about meh, ok... I rlly just wonder if it was possible to introduce and use the new boxes instead of the old ones. I´m sure that you will agree with meh after taking a closer look tot it. With best regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 17:41, 25 September 2011 (UTC)PS: I please everyone to respond at mah talk page, so I get it when You are on.

Seeking Your Opinion on Updating the Pharaoh Infobox[edit]

Hello there:

Just wanted to point out a proposed change to the Pharaoh infobox that I have made, and would value your opinion on.

Cheers! Captmondo (talk) 16:24, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

List of kings of Babylon - edits by anon[edit]

I hadn’t edited this page yet, as I had already corrected the Kassite monarch list sections on the Mesopotamia Dynasty list, Kassites and Short chronology timeline pages and felt that this just duplicated the information. Anon’s edits seem OK, although describing Dynasty V as Kassite is definitely a minority view, and Shutruk-Nahhunte overthrew Zababa-shuma-iddin and not Enlil-nadin-ahi.BigEars42 (talk) 11:08, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, according to Georges Roux in Ancient Iraq, Dynasty V was Kassite, he may be wrong of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.116.120 (talk) 21:44, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Hi. ;-) I´d like to know where I could expand the Pharaoh´s list that appear for example in Peribsen. Some of the 2nd dynasty kings are missing there. cheers; --Nephiliskos (talk) 21:21, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Thankie!^^ Meanwhile I was VERY busy. I thought some kind of "congress" was good in whih everyone who assisted and advised meh so generously shall be there, to discuss the up-to-date sutuation. Is my administrating the new box good? Are there still questions? Pls take some moments and join the discussion. Thx. Cheers;--Nephiliskos (talk) 18:09, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
I have answered at mah page, together with a question. Cheers;--Nephiliskos (talk) 10:05, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Imhotep´s dreams[edit]

Hi. Oh, oh, oh...! Oh my, the source for the article´s text is ANCIENT! 1923???? That was even before Hitler! That´s a no-no, such overaged sources CAN be used, but then it shall be said, that it is overaged and it shall be used only together with an up-todate source! Who knows, the overaged translation might be overaged, too. I will study the Neferkasokar-story again, maybe I´ll find some infos about Imhoteps dream? Besides, I´m curious, does Imo really appear in the famine-stela? I always thought its about king Djoser who was admonished by Khnum to sacrifise him "all good things" so the god would make the nile flow again...? Hmmmmm... At least I think its worth a research. Thx! Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 12:53, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

And soon I found something.^^ Looks like I better re-write the articles about Imhotep and the famine-stela. The half of the information IS overaged and wrong. Cheers;--Nephiliskos (talk) 13:00, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Your wish was mah order. ;D cheers;--Nephiliskos (talk) 19:44, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I guarantee you, that NONE of mah sentences is made of own-point-of-view. I merely and actually try to avoid 1:1-copying from the books. In German Wikipedia for example thou can get LOT of trouble, if yer text is copied 1:1! Thx for yer help. Cheers;--Nephiliskos (talk) 14:29, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
To see the translation yourself, look here. Regards; --Nephiliskos (talk) 01:51, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I hope you are not angry. I myself be not seeking for trouble, ok? But I re-wrote some passages again, now beeing much closer to the source. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 02:15, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi.^^ The epoche of the Ptolemy-dynasty reached from 332B.C. up to 31B.C., shortly after Cleopatra´s death. Ptolemy V. reigned from 205 - 180 B.C.. I have re-written special passages to clear up that thing. Hope, it helps. Cheers;--Nephiliskos (talk) 12:42, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cleisthenes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boule (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) 18:13, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

October 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Adela of France, Countess of Flanders may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • that time the Count of Flanders was Adela's grandson, [[Arnulf III, Count of Flanders|Arnulf III]]). When she heard about Robert's plans, she asked [[Philip I of France|Philip I]] to stop him.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link fixing one-day contest[edit]

I have decided to put on a mini-contest within the November 2013 monthly disambiguation contest, on Saturday, November 23 (UTC). I will personally give a $20 Amazon.com gift card to the disambiguator who fixes the most links on that server-day (see the project page for details on scoring points). Since we are not geared up to do an automated count for that day, at 00:00, 23 November 2013 (UTC) (which is 7:00 PM on November 22, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the project page leaderboard. I will presume that anyone who is not already listed on the leaderboard has precisely nine edits. At 01:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC) (8:00 PM on November 23, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the leaderboard at that time (the extra hour is to give the board time to update), and I will determine from that who our winner is. I will credit links fixed by turning a WP:DABCONCEPT page into an article, but you'll have to let me know me that you did so. Here's to a fun contest. Note that according to the Daily Disambig, we currently have under 256,000 disambiguation links to be fixed. If everyone in the disambiguation link fixers category were to fix 500 links, we would have them all done - so aim high! Cheers! bd2412 T 02:06, 18 November 2013 (UTC)


January 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Adam Jerzy Czartoryski may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • thought that Czartoryski, who more than any other man had prepared the way for the creation of [[Congress Poland] and had designed the [[Constitution of the Kingdom of Poland]], would be [[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Abdülmecid I may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • say Circassian --> HH Valide Sultan Tirimüjgün or [[Tirimüjgan Sultan|Tirimüjgan Kadın Efendi]] (16 August 1819 – Constantinople, Fariya Palace, 3 October 1852 or 2 November 1853, married in

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:24, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Alexey Razumovsky may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Russian capital from a mission to Hungary, was impressed with his vocal ability, and took him to [[Saint Petersburg] where he joined the choir of the Ukrainian palace chapel.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:52, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Svetlana Kirilovskaya PROD - Fictional?[edit]

Hi, wow, good eye! It hadn't occurred to me that the subject might be fictional. The article has no references, so it should have been a tip-off to me that a person had such a comprehensive knowledge with no references. Anyhow, again, good eye! And if you are correct, should we treat edits such as this reverted one as vandalism? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:43, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Also wanted to chime in with thanks for spotting those fictional entries. Some breaching experiement by a new account, User:Lisa lisa678, I suppose.--Milowenthasspoken 21:58, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Hey @Chewings72: and @Milowent:. I don't remember the exact phrasing in the fake article, but I feel like there were multiple "beloved"s a la "Kirilovskaya was the beloved daughter of so-and-so", which I feel I deleted. I have had my eyes on IP 108.48.144.42 for a while for some disruptive editing, and happened to notice their recent edit to Anastasia (disambiguation), which contained (unnecessary) content like "...and the beloved favorite of her paternal grandmother, Dowager Empress Marie." The "beloved" raised a few hairs, so I thought I'd bring it up here, in case either of you think it warrants a closer look. It could just be a coincidence, but I thought I'd plant a seed. IP appears to be engaged in some shady editing anyway, which they will ultimately be blocked for. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:44, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
@Cyphoidbomb: Thank you for spotting the similarity in the language. I had a look at the IP's edit history and the IP seems to be focusing on editing American movies and cartoon characters rather than showing any interest in writing biographies as occurred in the fake Svetlana Kirilovskaya article. I'll keep a watch on this IP just in case he/she starts moving into broader activities. Regards --Chewings72 (talk) 04:03, 30 January 2014 (UTC)


March 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sayyid Brothers may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • In 1713, Jahandar's nephew [[Farrukhsiyar]] (r1713-1719)]] became the emperor with the brothers' help. His reign marked the ascendancy of the brothers, who

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:17, 9 March 2014 (UTC)


May 2014[edit]

Information icon In a recent edit to the page Delian league, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. The "s" form of words instead of the "z" form is a valid spelling variation. I believe the Greek form of names is used rather than the Roman in this article because it is about a Greek subject. I have no strong feelings about that, but consensus should be sought on article talk pages before arbitrarily changing. SpinningSpark 11:33, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

@Spinningspark: Thanks for the feedback on the reasons for your reverting my changes. I have a strong interest in Ancient Greek and Roman history and over the years I have read many Wikipedia articles relating to the history of that period. I thought it reasonable to seek some consistency by using Byzantium rather than Byzantion, as I can't recall too many other major articles where the Greek version is used. However, like you, I have no strong feelings about it. So happy to accept your reversion. (Although surely I don't need to seek consensus on trying to get some consistency in spelling of Byzantium??)
On the English spelling issue, I do understand the Wikipedia rules about spelling. However, I find it an issue in reading "European" articles as to what should be the correct spelling to use when articles have a mix of both American and British English. And I know there are and have been lengthy and ongoing debates over this issue, but in my opinion, it is a pity that American English does seem to be preferred if there is any uncertainty. Regards --Chewings72 (talk) 13:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC) .
On "Byzantium" you might be right, and I'm pretty sure that was that in the article at one time, but since someone has changed it in the past it is clear that not everyone agrees. Rather than continuous slow motion back-and-forth in the article, it needs to be decided what it is supposed to be on the talk page. I would have reverted you just as readily if it had been the other way round.
On the WP:ENGVAR issue, if editors cannot agree or the article has no consistent spelling style then per WP:RETAIN we look in the edit history for the first editor to clearly use a particular spelling system and go with that. SpinningSpark 13:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
@Spinningspark: Thanks for the helpful advice regarding which form of English to use in articles. I will follow that approach in future. --Chewings72 (talk) 01:29, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

List of Roman consuls[edit]

What was wrong with the wiki link you removed with this edit? It looks like the right person is linked. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 23:05, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

@Tarlneustaedter: The link before my change was to Gaius Servilius Structus Ahala who was a mid-5th-century BC Roman politician. According to Livy, Ahala served as magister equitum in 439 BC and is famous for saving Rome from Spurius Maelius in 439 BC by killing him with a dagger concealed under an armpit. The consul who this link should be pointing to also has the name Gaius Servilius Structus Ahala. There is no specific Wikipedia article on him. However, the Wikipedia Ahala disambiguation page says that this Gaius Servilius Structus Ahala was a consul in 478 BC and died in his year of office. So based on this information it would seem that the two individuals are not the same person. Perhaps they were father and son or even grandfather and grandson? --Chewings72 (talk) 01:26, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Got it, thanks. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 02:49, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Henry III's Coronation[edit]

Hi,

Not sure if I am doing this right, but you queried a minor edit I made to the caption for the image of Henry III's coronation. I had four broad reasons for the change. 1) The image itself suggests an impressive setting and occasion. This is much more likely to be the properly organized and lavish coronation at Westminster in 1220 as opposed to the rather makeshift affair at St Peter's Abbey, Gloucester in 1216. 2) The illustrator is much more likely to have depicted the second, papally-approved, coronation conducted by the Archbishop rather than the much less impressive earlier event which made a second coronation necessary 3) The only other captions I have seen for this image either make no comment on which occasion it was or state that it was the 1220 event. 4) The current caption gives no source for it being 1217 and I think it unlikely that it was. But I'd be very happy to know of evidence to the contrary. But as this is obviously all opinion not demonstrable fact, I though it reasonable to query the current caption rather than overwrite or contradict it. AMarkworthy (talk) 14:26, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 10[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Bookshelf.jpg

Books & Bytes
Issue 10, January-February 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - ProjectMUSE, Dynamed, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, and Women Writers Online
  • New TWL coordinator, conference news, and a new guide and template for archivists
  • TWL moves into the new Community Engagement department at the WMF, quarterly review

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 March 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #148[edit]

Tech News: 2015-11[edit]

15:18, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 March 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #149[edit]

Tech News: 2015-12[edit]

15:14, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 March 2015[edit]

.

Lucas.[edit]

Why the reversion? 163.1.111.68 and 193.39.159.73 are the same editor, working on public computers. The edits are equally accurate & valid. - Regards, 163 / 193 / 194, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.39.159.73 (talk) 16:17, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #150[edit]

Tech News: 2015-13[edit]

15:09, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #151[edit]