User talk:Daniel the Monk

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

Welcome!

Hello, Daniel the Monk, 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! --Ronz (talk) 20:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Contents

Edits[edit]

You are not leaving edit summaries with most of your edits. Also you aren't providing any references for you edits. Your ones for Cowl seem to suggest you beleive it is only a religious item. It is not it is basically a hood without a jacket in medieval times is had should covering as well. The term is still in use today see [1] --Kitchen Knife (talk) 21:35, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Not sure why you pedantically insist on US spellings - especially in an article like White Ladies Priory that refers to a place in the UK. British users know the US spellings, but don't use them, and are apt to find them irritating in this sort of context - especially when they have been deliberately altered. Sjwells53 (talk) 15:50, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, but it's the auto-correct on my computer, for when I do editing.Daniel the Monk (talk) 02:34, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

January 2010[edit]

Information.svg Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Congregation of the Dominican Sisters of St. Catherine of Siena‎. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also useful when reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 03:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Seven Nations (Celtic)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Seven Nations (Celtic) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

neologism

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

St. Mary's Abbey Sisters[edit]

The Sisters are not Trappistine's. [2]. Please go revert yourself. Thanks. Malke2010 04:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Are you aware that the Trappistines are Cistercians, but not all Cistercian nuns are Trappistines?

Cistercian versus Trappistine[edit]

I sympathize with your desire to be exact, but in this case, this is how the Sisters at St. Mary's Abbey identify themselves. The Trappistine's (sorry for my spelling) are more closely identified with the male members of the order. The Cistercian's are derivative, and you could certainly say that in the line, but there must be no mistake that the Sisters identify themselves as Cistercian. You must also understand that replacing Cistercian with Trappistine is confusing when someone accesses the citation.Malke2010 20:44, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Also, it's not good to go back and revert again. You could end up running up against WP:REVERT 3 RR and you don't want that. What is better is to open a section on the article talk page, or go to the editor's talk page and ask them about it directly there.Malke2010 20:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea what you mean by saying the Cistercians are derivate of the Trappists (which, by the way, is how the monks are called). If you mean historically, that is incorrect, and is the other way around. The term "Trappistine" refers only to the nuns of the Order. They have been known as Trappistine since their foundation, and still use the term themselves. See the link to their candy provided in the article.

Don't forget to sign your posts. The Sisters' website makes it clear what they identify as, and that is what we must go by. However, I did open a section on the talk page. The other editors will leave comments and the matter will be settled by consensus. Thanks. Malke2010 21:01, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem. How does one sign one's posts here? The problem comes from the Sisters' dual identity. I would think that the hot link to the main article on Trappists (which does explain the connection to the Trappistines) does clarify the matter. Further, the abbey is listed internationally in the Trappist Order's own directory of their establishments: http://www.ocso.org/HTM/net/monwb-en.htm

About how to sign your post: Just take a look at the end of your welcome message above ;) . Best, The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 21:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Regarding your other comments, please take a look at the talk page of the article in question.The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 21:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
When you get to the end of your sentence, after the period, place four tildes (four of these ~) at the end. Do you see that?Malke2010 22:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

St. John Neumann[edit]

Saw your edit on St. John Neumann. He's a favorite of mine.Malke2010 05:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for the notice.Daniel the Monk (talk) 05:42, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Sisters, IHM[edit]

Hi Daniel, About this article, [3], I've always been told the IHM was first established in Ireland. I know there are schools there run by IHM, because I went to one. Maybe they're the ones from Spain, originally. But it was Irish IHM who staffed schools in Philadelphia, too, as far as I was told. Is that correct?Malke2010 22:31, 7 July 2010 (UTC) Sorry, Malke, these Sisters were founded in Michigan. Many of the their latter members may have been from Ireland, but the congregation was founded here.Daniel the Monk (talk) 01:51, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Bishop of Durham[edit]

You have just added:- "Except for a brief period of suppression during the Glorious Revolution under Oliver Cromwell, this temporal power of the office lasted until all such authorities were abolished in 1836". The Glorious Revolution was not under Oliver Cromwell, but later when William and Mary took over as monarch. Which do you mean? Could you also find a source for this? --Bduke (Discussion) 22:38, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. The result of hurried writing while suffering physical pain.Daniel the Monk (talk) 13:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: Jackie Cooper[edit]

Thanks for raising the point about "skilled" nursing home - wasn't familiar that this was an industry term until now. However, this leads to another issue - the term seems to be strongly associated with United States usage based on the nursing home article. Therefore, since many in Wikipedia's international audience may not be familiar with the term, it may again be better to simply indicate "nursing home" in this case (with perhaps a link to the article). Dl2000 (talk) 03:28, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Confirmation[edit]

My deepest apologies for posting to the wrong page, I was wearing the wrong glasses! Reposting/ DocOfSocTalk 00:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

See [[4]] OOPS! DocOfSocTalk 00:58, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Confirmation[edit]

Personal research is a violation of Original research. Please read. Pre Vatican II children were routinely confirmed in junior high in the U.S. My own OR, I was confirmed on November 22, 1960, in 8th grade. I can't use that either because a recognized citation needs to be found to confirm (pun intended) this. PTL DocOfSocTalk 21:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I very politely said "("Personal Recollection" is a violation of "personal research" Besides that you are incorrect)"
I purposefully never said you were "wrong," a much harsher word. The Original research link is above and here again, so that you may read it; It is the documentation you asked for which I did indeed supply. "40 years ago" is Pre-Vatican II which opened in October 1962. I also recommend you read Good Faith.
Comments on articles belong on the article's discussion page, not on my personal talk page. You said "(Change age of reception prior to Vatican II from my own personal rellocation of the era) which has you re-locating rather than recollecting. Civility is part of Wikipedia's code of conduct, and is one of Wikipedia's five pillars. The civility policy is a standard of conduct that sets out how Wikipedia editors should interact. Stated simply, editors should always treat each other with "consideration and respect". I suggest you read those also. Jesus said the same thing 2000 years ago. As a fellow Catholic, I am dismayed at the tone of your missive. Peace be with you... DocOfSocTalk 23:55, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Stanislaus of Kazimierz[edit]

Hello. Just wanted you to know that I reversed your cut and paste move of Stanislaus of Kazimierz because that type of move loses the article's history and therefore doesn't meet GFDL requirements. There is more info at WP:COPYPASTE and WP:CWW. In order to suggest a name change that might possibly be controversial, there are instructions at WP:Requested moves. I noticed your request on the article's talk page and have taken the liberty of formatting it as a move request that will automatically show up as a listing at WP:Requested moves. If that is not what you intended, please feel free to just undo my edit. Best wishes - Station1 (talk) 17:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Much appreciated.Daniel the Monk (talk) 00:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Franciscan comments[edit]

I noticed your edits in the Franciscan topics and I would like to get your feedback on a topic I brought up on the Talk:Franciscan page. Part of it revolves around the fact that I know many Catholic Franciscans don't consider any non-Catholic group really Franciscan due to the obedience to the Pope issue, but even in trying to keep things NPOV for WP I am not sure how we should be handling people adding new "non-denominational" Franciscan groups. It seems most of these groups except for the "official" Anglican ones are real small. We relegate all the official Catholic Third Order groups to the Third Order pages for notability reasons. What do you think we should be doing with these groups? The reason this came up is the recent addition of the "Companions of Jesus" to that section. Other then the fact I have never even heard of them (but I don't usually hear about UK groups) the added sections definitely seems improperly weighted but the big question is, should they be there at all? Thanks for any comments. Marauder40 (talk) 13:59, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, Marauder. In the interest of full disclosure, I should say that I have good friends who are Brothers, in both in the Anglican Society of St. Francis and the Order of Ecumenical Franciscans.
Regarding the issue of inclusion of non-Roman Catholic groups, as far as I am concerned, they ARE Franciscans. They follow a way of life inspired by St. Francis, and thus merit the name and inclusion on that page. I have been a part of the Franciscan movement for over forty years, and I have never heard anyone challenge their inclusion in the wider Franciscan world.
The issue really revolves around the title of the page. It is simply "Franciscan." Were one to include them in the pages of any of the three Orders of Friars Minor, e.g., there would be grounds for disputing such an inclusion, but not for the most general form of description.Daniel the Monk (talk) 14:20, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I was only mentioning the fact that many Catholic religious order members do not consider non-Catholic Franciscans as true religious Order as a side-line. Like I said, it is their view that in order to truly follow St. Francis you have to follow everything St. Francis did and part of that is being obedient to the Pope, Bishops, Church, etc. They do respect non-Catholic religious, but have "issues" with it. I realize WP isn't the place for taking up that "argument" so have no problem with Anglican groups and larger groups being mentioned on the Franciscan page. My problem is where do we draw the line? Both within the Catholic Franciscan world and the non-Catholic Franciscan world there are hundreds (if not thousands) of groups that claim to follow the teachings of St. Francis. It is easier to deal with the Catholic groups because either they are official and have an official status within the church or they don't. If they are Catholic and to small to have an official status they aren't notable enough to be on WP. If they do have a status, they can be relegated to their appropriate page. We don't have that luxury with the "non-denominational" groups. Any group can claim to be following some of the ideals of St. Francis and want their group included on the main Franciscan page. How should we determine which of the hundreds of groups that may want this are notable enough to be included there? My personal take after viewing the "Companions of Jesus" web page was that they are to small for notability reasons and definitely to small for the amount of weight given in the current article. Maybe having some requirement that the group be notable enough to have a WP article in the first place before they can be added to the Franciscan page or something like that will help, but it isn't that hard to just create a page and whether someone notices its creation to challenge notability or not is questionable. But figure since I am a Franciscan myself wanted other views.Marauder40 (talk) 14:55, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Pax et bonum then. After all the negligible groups and pages I have seen on this site, I really don't see any way to set limits on what constitutes significant here. Solitary individuals as well as gropus get pages. This also allows pages on obscure saints, on the other hand. It's part of being an all-inclusive repository of data, I suppose. Sorry I'm not more helpful.Daniel the Monk (talk) 15:09, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Pax et bonum, thanks again for the comments. Based on that maybe I will trim down the "Companions of Jesus" section based on weight reasons and not worry about whether they are notable enough, until others do. Based on my interactions in the controversial pages, like abortion, politics, etc. I know that the secular side of WP will have issues with groups that have no mention outside of their own personal web-pages, I will leave it up to them to deal with it. Thanks again. Marauder40 (talk) 15:29, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Link to Congo disambiguation page[edit]

When you edited the Minim (religious order) article, you added a link to Congo, which is a disambiguation page rather than an article. If you know from the source material whether it's referring to the Republic of the Congo or the Democratic Republic of the Congo, could you please edit your link to point to the appropriate page? Most common usage referring to the country simply as "Congo" is about Republic of the Congo, not the DRC, but I didn't want to assume that in this case since you're probably more familiar with the topic. Thanks! LarryJeff (talk) 21:20, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, Larry! I appreciate the help. Daniel the Monk (talk) 01:48, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Royal Mint[edit]

The Bold page rename at Royal Mint is problematic.

  • Any page move should be uncontroversial. Clearly, this is not the case, as the page name has been discussed on the article's talk page.
  • The edit summary states “there were other royal mints besides the British one”. Please name them. Were they called “The Royal Mint”, as the British mint is known?
  • How would a reader find the Royal Mint following this move?
  • Also, the editor moving a page is responsible for repairing the redirects (found at 'What links here').

Please revert your moves and initiate a discussion at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Thanks, Daicaregos (talk) 07:58, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I had looked at the article "Mint" before I did the change. I have also looked at the discussion page on the article, and it seems that there is no discussion on there about this point, other than a complaint about a bias in emphasis on the American mint. So I don't see the controversy. Prior to my move, the article was the only one which would come up in a search for "Royal Mint." You will notice that there are three other "Royal Mints" listed in the article on "Mint", apart from the British one. Since it clearly is not the only one in the world, as can be seen from the article itself, I don't see the issue or any controversy. I did change the Redirect for "Royal Mint" to "Mint (coin)" and my move clarified that the article in question was the mint of only one nation. Daniel the Monk (talk) 21:28, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Elizabeth Tyldesley[edit]

Please desist from adding unnecessary links about Ambrose Barlow to an article about another person.--J3Mrs (talk) 16:12, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Desist?? I had never heard of him before today. The article I edited already had a link to him, which you would have seen in the history. And since when is there a limit on links? Daniel the Monk (talk) 17:46, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
You appear to enjoy providing multiple links to the same thing, WP:Overlinking. Ambrose Barlow has his own article, that's where all the links about him belong. If I look up one person I don't expect a link farm on somebody else. --J3Mrs (talk) 17:56, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
While I won't argue some of the changes you made to my text, we have a disagreement about a number of things. Firstly, your change of the term "Mass" to be uncapitalized is offensive to members of my faith. Secondly, there are also a number of changes you have made which removed standard references made within religious communities, and thus are proper to the article. The different references to St. Ambrose give a context to someone who, like myself, had no idea who he was, and without that, might not be motivated to look further. As with Mother Clare Mary Ann, indication of one's religious Order is considered a standard part of one's name, like "Jr." Particularly as a fellow Benedictine, I question why you consider the standard use of the Order's initials for him as overkill. Daniel the Monk (talk) 18:11, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Since I now see that you created the article, I have to point out that you made a number of factual errors in it, which might have been avoided by actually checking the links in it. Daniel the Monk (talk) 18:18, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
I usually decapitalise nouns that aren't proper nouns but if it is offensive, replace it. I might add you don't know my faith and I edit in as neutral a way as I can. I probably wouldn't have removed the abbreviations if had there not been serial overlinking throughout your edit. I reiterate strings of overlinking as you did for Ambrose Barlow belong in his article not this. The factual errors being?--J3Mrs (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
I edit from a neutral point of view, you obviously have an axe to grind. --J3Mrs (talk) 18:45, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
I regret that you are taking it that way, but I am trying to make the article as clear as possible, especially for those who, like myself, are not as conversant with terms common in the U.K, and respecting the ettiquete in use among us in Religious Orders. Since you ask, here are two of the factual errors in your original text. The article originally stated that Mary Ward entered the monastery with Elizabeth. Inaccurate by three years. It also stated that the women were received into Holy Orders. This was not possible then in the Roman Catholic Church, as remains true today. Links can help. Daniel the Monk (talk) 19:02, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
If you're in religious orders then I'm a Chinese whore from Mars. Malleus Fatuorum 03:37, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
What a typically sad comment. On the bright side, you show an excellent grasp of the English language for someone in your profession and locale. Daniel the Monk (talk) 00:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
But I'm not a Chinese whore from Mars. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 00:39, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
Are you sure? On this site, documentation is required. Daniel the Monk (talk) 00:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm quite certain, as human life is not possible on Mars. And even if it were the speed of light would make it impossible for me to respond to your posting so quickly. But you claim to be a monk, or at least in religious orders. Are you really? Malleus Fatuorum 00:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Daniel the Monk (talk) 00:46, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, right. Malleus Fatuorum 00:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Glen Springs Sanitarium[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Glen Springs Sanitarium has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Relies on one single source, does not signify importance. Please elaborate and include more sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Touch Of Light (talk) 03:26, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Some tips to help you out![edit]

Hi Daniel the Monk, I thought I'd drop a few notes on your talk page with some help on writing articles :o)

First of all, it may be best for you to do a bit of reading, starting with the Wikipedia manual of style, which will give you a lot of information about how Wikipedia prefers its articles to be written. It's not as hard to follow as it might look; quite a bit of the information there probably won't be vital for you at first.

Second, I recommend you make a user sandbox - which is just an area you can use to practise in, and to make notes in, and to get things ready in. If you click this red link: user:Daniel the Monk/Sandbox, that will let you create that page (it gives you an edit window to start work in). Anything, anywhere, on the help and information pages which gives you an example, try it out in your sandbox until you're familiar with it.

For your article, the next thing you want to do is start collecting as much information as you can about it. Google searches (particularly in Books and Scholar) will be your best friend for this! Once you've found the information, the next most important thing is to start writing up each fact in your own words (very important, this), and make a note at the same time of exactly where that information came from. Build in the references as you go along; I'm going to copy in, down below this, a whole heap of help on doing references, which was produced by one of our best teachers (Chzz).

Here's another place that you'll find incredibly useful - citation templates which you can copy and paste into your sandbox, between <ref></ref> tags; you just fill in the blanks from your sources into the template, and you'll end up with nicely formatted inline citations :o) It all helps. Remember to add a references section to your sandbox (make a new line, and put ==References== on it, and type {{reflist}} on the next line, so that you can see how your citations look as you do them. Remember to save your page often! You don't want to lose your work.

Hopefully this will give you a good start and make life easier for you.

One last thing to keep as a motto: "It's better to write one good, well-referenced, nicely-presented article than it is to create fifty unreferenced one-line stubs!" Pesky (talkstalk!) 13:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

How references work[edit]

Simple references[edit]

These require two parts;

a)
Chzz is 98 years old.<ref> "The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref>

He likes tea. <ref> [http://www.nicecupofteaandasitdown.com Tea website] </ref>
b) A section called "References" with the special code "{{reflist}}";
== References ==
{{reflist}}

(an existing article is likely to already have one of these sections)

To see the result of that, please look at user:chzz/demo/simpleref. Edit it, and check the code; perhaps make a test page of your own, such as user:Daniel the Monk/reftest and try it out.

Named references[edit]

Chzz was born in 1837. <ref name=MyBook>
"The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. 
</ref> 

Chzz lives in Footown.<ref name=MyBook/>

Note that the second usage has a / (and no closing ref tag). This needs a reference section as above; please see user:chzz/demo/namedref to see the result.

Citation templates[edit]

You can put anything you like between <ref> and </ref>, but using citation templates makes for a neat, consistent look;

Chzz has 37 Olympic medals. <ref> {{Citation
 | last = Smith
 | first = John
 | title = Olympic medal winners of the 20th century
 | publication-date = 2001
 | publisher = [[Cambridge University Press]]
 | page = 125
 | isbn = 0-521-37169-4
}}
</ref>

Please see user:chzz/demo/citeref to see the result.

For more help and tips on that subject, see user:chzz/help/refs.

Something to make your life easier![edit]

Hi there Daniel the Monk! I've just come across one of your articles, and noticed that you might appreciate some help with references.

You might want to consider using this tool - it makes your life a whole heap easier, by filling in complete citation templates for your links. All you do is install the script on Special:MyPage/common.js, or or Special:MyPage/vector.js, then paste the bare url (without [...] brackets) between your <ref></ref> tabs, and you'll find a clickable link called Reflinks in your toolbox section of the page (probably in the left hand column). Then click that tool. It does all the rest of the work (provided that you remember to save the page! It doesn't work for everything (particularly often not for pdf documents), but for pretty much anything ending in "htm" or "html" (and with a title) it will do really, really well. Happy editing! Pesky (talkstalk!) 13:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey, Pesky, thanks for the tip! Much appreciated. I don't quite follow all of it, as Wiki still leaves me feeling like I'm walking through a forest, but I just saw your examples, and they are a big help. From your profile, though, sounds like just your kind of habitat, lol. Great photo, btw, of you and the wolf. Cheers!Daniel the Monk (talk) 23:39, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:English Roman Catholic Religious Sisters[edit]

Category:English Roman Catholic Religious Sisters, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. Occuli (talk) 18:43, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Regarding this edit summary[edit]

Re this edit summary: yes—Eastern or Roman Catholic. Which is why I did this: not all will be Eastern Catholics. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:32, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

True, but Roman rite Ukrainian Sisters can be covered with other Roman Catholic Sisters, no?Daniel the Monk (talk) 21:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, they could. I was referring to removing the parent category, which was Category:Eastern Catholics. If they are not all Eastern Catholics, then Category:Eastern Catholics should not be the parent category. I was just explaining why I changed the parent category. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:24, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Question[edit]

So a nun is not a cleric? Please explain. (Also please note that it is important to look at all of what you revert.) LadyofShalott 14:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

No, she would not be, at least not a Catholic one. A cleric receives Holy Orders and in the Roman Catholic Church, that is taught to be possible only for males. In fact, as of last year, public support of women priests in the Catholic Church is grounds for excommunication. Thus nuns are automatically lay women, but ones who led a consecrated life. She would be termed a monastic, or, more generally, a religious, which applies to any member of a religious institute, male, female, lay or cleric. Daniel the Monk (talk) 14:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
OK. LadyofShalott 14:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Keynsham & Keynsham Abbey[edit]

Hi, On Keynsham you changed "Victorine order of Augustinian monks" to "Victorine congregation of canon regulars" while on Keynsham Abbey it says "Augustinian Canons Regular", based on this source. I'm not expert on Augustinian vs Victorine so could you check both articles are OK & say the same thing?— Rod talk 20:23, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Rod. I had already looked, only because Augustinian and monk were not synonomous in that period. All canons regular are automatically Augustinians, as explained in the entry on them and in the more general one of Augustinians. The Victorines were an autonomous grouping within that Order. Daniel the Monk (talk) 21:14, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
OK thanks.— Rod talk 21:52, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Post-nominal initials[edit]

Hi. I was interested in your edits at the article Dominic of Evesham. I note that you gave edit summaries of This is not a document of the time, he was a Benedictine and the postnominal initials of the Order to which he belonged are appropriate as such and this is a Benedictine article, use Benedictine practice. User:Ealdgyth has raised the question with me of whether this contradicts the precedent of not using the post-nominal pbuh on our Muhammad article. At this stage, without taking sides in your dispute, I want to ask you this. Was your opinion one that was formed by consensus, or were you merely exercising individual editorial discretion? If the former, can you point me to where the consensus was formed? If the latter, would you mind if I raised the issue centrally so that such a consensus can be fairly formed? Thanks in advance, --John (talk) 20:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, John. This was my on own discretion, based on centuries-old practice. The example Ealdgyth brings up might be apples and oranges. Post-nominal initials for a member of a religious institute are not an honorific. Its use is considered equivalent to "Jr." or "IV", while that term seems to be a religious blessing. In the West, we have an equivalent term used for venerated deceased people, "of blessed memory". So personally I don't see the connection. Hope this helps. Daniel the Monk (talk) 14:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I intend to help resolve this disagreement by posting centrally. I will let you know when I do so. --John (talk) 20:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
  • It's here. --John (talk) 21:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks for joining the discussion. --John (talk) 09:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Archbishop Sanchez[edit]

Many thanks for expanding the article about Archbishop Robert Sanchez. I prefer to start with stubs in writing articles and let others expand the articles. Also I have no problems about the change in the style of dating. Thank you again=RFD (talk) 21:47, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Frédéric Janssoone[edit]

Hi Daniel. This article doesn't need Category:Beatified people because it already has Category:Franciscan beatified people, which is a subcategory of Beatified people. Pburka (talk) 04:51, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, there. I understand your point, but the issue to me is whether someone looking at the wider category would necessarily look in the subcategories unless they already had specific information on a person, knowing, e.g., that he or she was a Franciscan or Dominican or Benedictine. That's why I feel the duplication is better. Daniel the Monk (talk) 04:55, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Daniel. That's contrary to the guidelines at WP:Categorization. (Each article should be placed in all of the most specific categories to which it logically belongs. This means that if a page belongs to a subcategory of C (or a subcategory of a subcategory of C, and so on) then it is not normally placed directly into C.) Additionally, I'm concerned that your recent expansion of the article isn't supported by reliable sources. An archbishop's blog isn't a reliable source. For such a large addition, I would also strongly advise the addition of footnotes supporting each individual claim. Pburka (talk) 12:35, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing that out, Pburka. To my mind, this falls into the area of a non-diffusing category, which the guideline points out can be an exception to the general rule. This categorization allows for a quick reference to someone looking for people in that specific category, rather than having to go through a whole list of, in this case, beatified people, trying to find the beati of a particular movement.
I am not clear why you say that the archbishop's blog is not a reliable source. In what way? In this case it is another secondary source, which is also being requested of the article, so excluding it is a kind of Catch 22. It certainly adds to the notability of the subject of the article.
It also has the advantage of giving an image of the subject of the entry. I just wish I could figure out how to add it to the article, if that were allowed. Daniel the Monk (talk) 17:35, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

February 2012[edit]

Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Michael Rua, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Nat Gertler (talk) 17:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Religious Sisters v nuns[edit]

You created categories for religious sisters of various nationalities, but left the original categories (nuns) as well. They should have been merged, unless they are not the same thing, which I suspect they are. If you are going to create all sorts of new categories you should dispose of the existing ones which they are replacing. Now there are essentially duplicate categories and a mess to be sorted out. Quis separabit? 03:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Daniel. Please disregard the above. I discussed the matter with Good Olfactory and I was operating under a misconception. Again, please disregard. Yours, Quis separabit? 23:31, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

St. John the Baptist Church (Manhattan)[edit]

Hi. Regarding your edit to this article, the source cited does indeed say that "Both German churches had lay trustees that were so overbearing that they drove out several pastors," but it says nothing whatsoever about why they did it. To describe what they did as being the result of their "rebellious spirit" is a conclusion, and like any pit of analysis or interpretation of facts, it needs to be specifically sourced to be included in the article - which is why I have removed it. If you have a source which says this, specifically, please use it, but without such a source, the statement cannot be included in the article, so please do not restore it. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Baroness of Douglas for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Baroness of Douglas is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baroness of Douglas until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

from LUCIOBLUES to Daniel the Monk. May, 30 2012

Thanks for your 'correct the English and grammar' to my Traversari's page. Sorry for my english. Can you do something about french Traversari's page ? Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LUCIOBLUES (talkcontribs) 21:53, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

priories[edit]

Hi - this category Category:Priories is sparsely populated, even though there are at least 700 articles with the word 'priory' in the title - almost all of them that are monasteries are classified as such in the monasteries categorization hierarchy.

I'm thus thinking that we should probably just delete this category, and it's underused and monastery is probably sufficient. What do you think? --KarlB (talk) 14:13, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Karl.
I just looked at the category. Yes, using the category for monastery makes more sense to me, since that is what it is. A rose by any other name, haha. Daniel the Monk (talk) 15:50, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Ok thanks. I've nominated it here: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_June_27#Category:Priories; feel free to weigh in with your thoughts. best, Karl

Francis de Sales[edit]

The info you requested a citation for is here: [5]. I'm inexperienced with doing citations, so would you mind doing it? PsychoInfiltrator (talk) 00:00, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

William Seton burial[edit]

Sorry for not answering before. You should write me at giunti.matteo (at) gmail.com for more info on William Seton. Madmats (talk) 14:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Featuring your work on Wikipedia's front page: DYKs[edit]

Symbol question.svg Thank you for your recent articles, including Ignatius Lissner. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. Let me know if you need help, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 21:00, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Deutscher Sprache[edit]

You moved my concerns regarding the German parish to the article's talk page. I would not "sigh" on an article talk. I answered there what belongs there. "Bare url" doesn't. The bare url http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/saints/ns_lit_doc_20031005_freinademetz_en.html should be formatted to show a title, if possible a date, an author, a publisher. The only position where bare urls are wanted is in infoboxes. With a welcome notice of 2009, I thought you knew that ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Nirmala Joshi[edit]

Did you really want to put a user page template on Nirmala Joshi? Seems rather odd... Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 02:34, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't, but the person vandalizing the entry is not signed in so I had nowhere else to post it. Any suggestions? I really can't figure out how to refer this for consideration by other editors in dealing with the matter. Any help would be appreciated. I had wanted to request your help, but your talk page seems to be protected from editing. Daniel the Monk (talk) 18:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Dependency (religion)[edit]

Daniel, your addition to Dependency provided some good information for the encyclopedia. A disambiguation page is not the place for it though. I think it would make a good short article. If you would like to prepare it, that would be great, or I would be happy to. I'd make sure to give you credit as the original author. Right now, I've stored a draft in my user space at User:SchreiberBike/Workspace/Scratchpad and I've changed it slightly to better fit the style of an article. I also added a reference I found on-line (if you have better references, that would be great). If you would like to take a fresh look at it and make any changes you think are appropriate, you could do that in my workspace. After the new article has been added to the encyclopedia, we can add a link to it at Dependency. Thank you. SchreiberBike (talk) 02:40, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Schreiber. I've edited it. See what you think of it. My only concern is that, as a free standing entry, somebody is going to threaten to delete it for lack of additional references. I've put plenty of links, but I'm not sure if that would be enough for everybody. Daniel the Monk (talk) 04:57, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
I put it up at Dependency (religion). Time will tell if it stays. I did un-capitalize a couple of words to match with Wikipedia's manual of style, otherwise I didn't see any need for change. Thanks again. SchreiberBike (talk) 05:33, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

María de León Bello y Delgado[edit]

His original name is: María de León Bello y Delgado. I think the name should prevail in Spanish.--88.12.65.62 (talk) 18:12, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

That is not the correct form. Look at how her sibling's names are given in the entry. Plus your English needs much correction, which I am now doing. Daniel the Monk (talk) 18:15, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
María de León y Delgado and John of Jesus Hernández y Delgado, can correct their names in the other articles in other languages​​.--79.155.93.29 (talk) 08:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26[edit]

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.

John of Jesus Hernández y Delgado (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Cooper and Ecstasy
Adèle de Batz de Trenquelléon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Carmel

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:31, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Bachelot[edit]

Hi Daniel, I've reverted you again at Alexis Bachelot. Per the guideline at WP:OAS, you should not make major changes to a featured article without making an attempt to discuss the issue and gain consensus. This article has been reviewed by a number of users and the current version reflects that consensus. I'm willing to discuss possible changes, but please do not make major revisions to the article without proposing them on the talk page. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Some of your changes may have been beneficial (particularly, I appreciate the titles and abbreviations), but your version introduced a number of problems. Please familiarize yourself with the guidelines at WP:LEAD--your version is much too short of a lead for an article of this size. Also see WP:RS, wordpress blogs are not reliable sources. (I added an inline citation to the claim you questioned.) Mark Arsten (talk) 20:23, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Arsenius Walsh[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Arsenius Walsh at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Maile (talk) 21:33, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Daniel, there are more issues with this nomination. Could you please review these on the page and respond there? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Deaths from neurodegenerative disease[edit]

Three categories you created (Category:Deaths from neurodegenerative disease by state and subcats) have been nominated to be merged and deleted. Please see the discussion here. Tassedethe (talk) 20:27, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

WP:POSTNOM[edit]

Hello. Please note that the MOS talks about post-nominals in general; this includes post-nominals related to bodies of priests (see Post-nominal letters#Examples). --Omnipaedista (talk) 17:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I am not denying that they are, but by the standard protocol of religious institutes, as per the MOS, they are not considered honorifics, but are the equivalent of "Jr" or "Sr", which are considered part of a man's name in the MOS.
The explanation "religious Order initials are not honorifics, but denote heritage" seems to be irrelevant. Sr./Jr. are not the same as OFM or SJ. The latter are post-nominal titles, while the former aren't. I think that this is quite clear. The only way to be sure though, would be to ask the guideline's talk page for further clarification. --Omnipaedista (talk) 02:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Call them what you will, my point is that they serve a similar function, as opposed to the purpose of honorifics, in that any member of a religious institute is entitled to their use to indicate their belonging to it, regardless of his or her occupation in life otherwise. Thus it is a matter of belonging to a group, not "achievements". I am in agreement that it would be helpful to have this clarified. Daniel the Monk (talk) 15:29, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
I have opened a thread here. --Omnipaedista (talk) 17:31, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
The frequent editors of the guideline page indicated that there is no special exception for religious vs. non-religious postnomials. --Omnipaedista (talk) 13:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Also note that the inclusion of post-nominals in "Hugh of Saint Victor" has been deemed anachronistic and a violation of WP:NOR. --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:09, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I hardly consider two editors who openly state a lack of knowledge in this field as an authoritative consensus. I shall await other comments before I consider the matter closed.Daniel the Monk (talk) 17:02, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Pope Urban V[edit]

Howdy. Why are you reverting my pipelinks? The pipelinks are done for all the other Pope bio articles. GoodDay (talk) 04:12, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Good question. Is there a MOS to govern this? Listing them without a title seems odd. Daniel the Monk (talk) 05:13, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Why show Pope, when we know they are, since they're his predecessor & successor. Anyways, it's more important to have the 265 articles as consistent as possible. GoodDay (talk)

Disambiguation link notification for November 19[edit]

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.

Birmingham Oratory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Eton
Daughters of Providence (Paris) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Sedan
Fahr Abbey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Torricelli
Frederic Baraga (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Marquette
Frederick William Faber (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Joseph Brown
Ignatius Mrak (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Marquette
Jean-Jacques Olier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Presbytery

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 26[edit]

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.

Abbé de Coulmier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Estates General and First Estate
Andrew Bobola (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Kingdom of Poland
Anna Borkowska (Sister Bertranda) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Dispensation
Basilica of Regina Pacis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Vatican
Hôtel-Dieu de Québec (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Dieppe

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Arsenius Walsh[edit]

There have been reservations expressed about the sources used in the article as part of the DYK review. Are you planning to address these? Please respond there. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I thought the process was over. I would be happy to do so, but the main problem the last editor had, if I understood him correctly, was that he did not acccept the main source as reliable. What can one do with that? Daniel the Monk (talk) 20:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
I didn't know whether there might be other, clearly reliable sources out there that could be used. If there aren't, then we are indeed at a stand, and there doesn't seem to be anything more that can be done. The problem is that, absent a response, none of us could know there weren't other alternative sources. Thanks, and sorry it didn't work out. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
I'll keep my eye out when I have time, if only for the research. Thanks for your attention. Daniel the Monk (talk) 17:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC this Saturday Dec 1[edit]

You are invited to Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and workshops focused on film and the performing arts that will be held on Saturday, December 1, 2012, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and at meetup.com!--Pharos (talk) 07:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 4[edit]

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.

Catherine of St. Augustine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Plague and Hôtel-Dieu
Sisters of Providence of the Institute of Charity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Sisters of Providence and Mary Arundell
Felix-Joseph Barbelin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Saint Joseph's Hospital

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:02, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Christina the Astonishing[edit]

Forgive me for I am a little confused over whether she is "officially" a saint in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church. On the List of Saints article, she is listed as being venerated by Catholics, and I found a few sources that state she has a feast-day and was a saint, but I was doubtful of their completeness/reliability (She does not appear on sites such as www.catholic.org for instance). I could do with some further enlightenment.--Kawaii-Soft (talk) 23:31, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

No problem, one of the reasons Wikipedia has a certain reputation, but if you look at the last paragraph of her life it states there that the Catholic Church has never declared her to be a saint. Daniel the Monk (talk) 01:29, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Ooooh! I completely missed that! >_< I guess she's an "unofficial" saint then, to some people. Thanks! --Kawaii-Soft (talk) 21:26, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 11[edit]

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.

Áurea of San Millán (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Cell, Moor, Vita and La Rioja
Jean-Charles Cornay (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Red River
Jean-Martin Moye (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Mother Superior
Pierre Toussaint (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to French Empire
St. John O'Sullivan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to East Los Angeles

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Recent moves[edit]

Hi! I noticed you made a bunch of page moves putting people at their full name. While I'm sure you meant well, we don't title articles by the full name by default, but instead follow the guidelines outlined at WP:Commonname. Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:33, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, however, several of those figures are listed with their full names in some of the sources. What to do then? Daniel the Monk (talk) 17:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, usually a good way to see what would be best is to look at search results. While there are certain sites that always list the full name of political figures, looking at google news archives from their era will often show what most coverage actually referred to them as.--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Alix Le Clerc, Daniel the Monk!

Wikipedia editor FreeRangeFrog just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Beautiful article! Merry xmas!

To reply, leave a comment on FreeRangeFrog's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Redirect blanking[edit]

Hi, if you have an issue with a redirect that doesn't qualify for speedy deletion, please take it to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion rather than blank the page as you did with Ming Mang (disambiguation). Thanks! -- KTC (talk) 23:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I've already resolved an issue with the redirect which existed. Daniel the Monk (talk) 02:24, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 1[edit]

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.

Francis Spellman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Santa Maria, Sila, Nina and Pinta
Giovanni Battista Tolomei (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Chaldean language and Folio
Hugo Reid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Cathedral High School
John Joseph O'Connor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to St. Clare's Hospital
Laurent-Joseph-Marius Imbert (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Aix
San Salvador Monastery, Oña (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Zamora
St Mary's Seminary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Rev.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Celebration and Mini-Conference in NYC Saturday Feb 23[edit]

Doing the "Open Space" thing at one of our earlier NYC Wiki-Conferences.

You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 12th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Saturday February 23, 2013 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here, or at bit.ly/wikidaynyu. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues!

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!--Pharos (talk) 01:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Dominican House of Studies, Washington, D.C., alumni[edit]

Category:Dominican House of Studies, Washington, D.C., alumni, 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. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Dominican House of Studies, Washington, D.C., faculty[edit]

Category:Dominican House of Studies, Washington, D.C., faculty, 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. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for your efforts![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
In recognition of your excellent work over the last few days; making improvements and moving some not-often-viewed articles for the sake of WP:MOS. Thought you should know your efforts have been appreciated. Keep up the good work! Stalwart111 08:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. Much appreciated. Daniel the Monk (talk) 19:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Margaret McKenna[edit]

Thank you for your for fixing my grammar on Margaret McKenna. I have always found it hard to remember the post nominal letters for the different orders. --Guerillero | My Talk 18:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Company of St. Ursula‎[edit]

I'd like to draw your attention to the reliable sources guideline; particularly the part that says, "Reliable sources must be strong enough to support the claim." The Ursulines of the Roman Union website will never be reliable source for a claim to supernatural powers. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 20:11, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Are you serious? This has been recorded as part of her life story since the 16th century. The Ursulines have 500 years of history as an organization, and operate worldwide. I suggest that you consider this context, as pointed out the WP. Daniel the Monk (talk) 20:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
You think a website that believes Comic Sans is a good font is a serious source? With a reliable source you can say it is claimed she had divine powers but you can't say she had divine powers. This is not the Catholic Encyclopedia. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 20:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
So you are judging the site by its font??!! That is certainly a frivolous criterion. Plus nowhere does the article state that she had "powers". It relates her experiences, as she clearly must have shared with her followers. It is the same as when people judge recent military figures as being "charismatic" leaders. What proof would there be for that? Daniel the Monk (talk) 20:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Did you read what you wrote? You said she experienced a revelation from God and had "deep mystical gifts." Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 20:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes, and gifts does not equate with "powers" in the realm of spirituality. Daniel the Monk (talk) 20:51, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Powers, abilities. You're arguing semantics. The reality is that your revision says that God exists and mine doesn't necessarily say he doesn't and contains a minor grammar error. You tell me which revision better meets the burden of proof. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 21:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Proof of what? Her experiences? She reported it to her followers per the historical sources. The very fact that she had followers demonstrate her notability. The neutrality you seem to seek is not required in Wikipedia. I suggest that you look at the MOS on the topics of spirituality. Daniel the Monk (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Furthermore, if you have a strong disagreement, I suggest that you put the matter up for discussion and consensus, rather than just continually reverting my text. Daniel the Monk (talk)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello, Daniel the Monk. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Salesius Lemmens - burial[edit]

A small thing, but please see note on Talk page. Jsmith1000 (talk) 16:18, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Francis of Assisi[edit]

I'm confused by your edit summary where you reverted my move of Francis of Assisi's infobox. You said my edit was inaccurate, but I was only moving the location of the saint infobox and using a more generic box for the lead. --JFH (talk) 19:30, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

When I looked at your edit, "Christian leader" is not the format given by your WP reference, and it removes most of the information given under "type=saint". So I'm confused about what you are trying to accomplish. Daniel the Monk (talk) 19:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
According to the documentation I linked, template:infobox saint is intended for use in a veneration section. I copied and pasted the infobox to the section on his feast day, so no information is lost, it's just in a relevant section of the article. I replaced the lead infobox with template:infobox Christian leader. --JFH (talk) 19:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Look at the history and see how much of the data was no longer visible under the other template. I grant that the wording of the guideline given there seems confusing, and universally is not what is done in the articles. As an example, using Christian leader for a female Catholic saint would be totally inappropriate, as it presumes some form of clerical status. Daniel the Monk (talk) 19:48, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I just think leading with the saint box gives a lot of information that I wouldn't expect to find in an infobox or quick summary for someone like Francis, and I assume that's why the documentation is like that, though it does appear that many articles are not following it. There's template:infobox religious biography for women and others who are not leaders. Just to reiterate, no information was removed from the article, just moved down out of the lead. --JFH (talk) 20:33, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm not finding that template, but would presume that it works for religious figures who are not clergy or venerated as saints. I find the infobox is good for summarizing details that can be lost, or are often not included, in the text. Daniel the Monk (talk) 20:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Yep, just like I thought. Best for non-clergy and non-venerated Christians. The Dalai Lama gets to have the date of his re-incarnation noted. Daniel the Monk (talk) 20:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Burials in Krakow[edit]

Category:Burials in Krakow, 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. Armbrust The Homunculus 19:18, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Burials at the Sanctuary of Our Lady of Fatima[edit]

Category:Burials at the Sanctuary of Our Lady of Fatima, 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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:50, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Burials in Santarem District[edit]

Category:Burials in Santarem District, 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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Sculptor Ludwig Moroder[edit]

Dear Daniel..., Thanks for translating the article of Rudolf Moroder, you dit a terrific job. May I ask you to translate the article of de:Ludwig Moroder my grandfather and brother in law of Rudolf? He married Adele the sister of RUdolf they had the same family name but were not related (both my granfather Ludwig and my grandmother Adele were Moroders). Best regards and thanks so much Wolfgang --Moroderen (talk) 23:26, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 3[edit]

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.

Holy Cross Abbey (Cañon City) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Chapter and Latrobe
Sebastian de Aparicio (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Galicia and Tlalnepantla
St. Vincent's Seminary (Germantown) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Eastern seaboard and Bishop of Philadelphia
Claire Ferchaud (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Third Republic
Cornelius a Lapide (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bocholt
Donald J. Harrington (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Regis High School
Hartwerd (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Saint Hugh
Joseph Carrière (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Lyons
Miguel Zugastegui (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Criollos
Parish Church of St Mary and St Petroc (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Petroc
Petrus Codde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Archbishop of Utrecht
St Augustine's Priory, Ealing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to West London
Évariste Régis Huc (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Heishui

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11[edit]

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.

John of God (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Toledo and Galicia
Gabriel Moran (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Episcopal Church
Ignatius Maloyan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Transfiguration
Robert Graham (colonel) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to La Trappe
William Meninger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Enneagram

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Iris cat.jpg

Thanks for category edits on a bunch of Catholic pages.

>> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemusfeci) 17:27, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Are you an actual monk?[edit]

Hi :). Just curious, are you a real life monk? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blelbach (talkcontribs) 05:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Blelbach. Yes.

Category:Jesuit popes[edit]

Category:Jesuit popes, 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. —teb728 t c 07:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18[edit]

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.

Jonathan Morris (priest) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to San José
Ramón José Castellano (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Córdoba

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Ambrose Maréchal edit[edit]

Hello Daniel, good to see you again. I saw your edit to the article Ambrose Maréchal where in the edit summary you mention that the titles are "proper titles". I'm not sure what proper titles are. In my understanding, the words are not proper nouns which would be capitalized. My reading of the Wikipedia Manual of Style at WP:JOBTITLES is pretty clear that these would not be capitalized. What do you think. Thanks, SchreiberBike (talk) 23:02, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your greetings, Schreiber. In the MOS it says that when it is a case of a specific office, such as Mayor of Paris or Queen of Sheeba, the office is capitalized. This then applies to bishops, when one says, e.g., Bishop of Timbuktu. Also, in the the case of Maréchal, one is speaking of a specific group, the Society of Jesus. Hope this helps. Daniel the Monk (talk) 14:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I see the section you quoted gives King of France as an example. There is another section of the MOS which uses Mayor of London as opposed to he is the mayor as an example. Daniel the Monk (talk) 14:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I've looked more closely into the MOS and I see that you are right. In the main MOS it says "Standard or commonly used names of an office are treated as proper nouns." I had missed that before and will change my practice.
I differ with you though on some other capitalization points. Society of Jesus would be capitalized, but I wouldn't capitalize society used in a sentence without of Jesus. I base that on the MOS Institutions section where it says "Names of particular institutions are proper nouns and require capitals, but generic words for institutions (university, college, hospital, high school) do not." Also, I would not capitalize bull meaning a specific kind of communication. Are you comfortable with those changes? Thank you. SchreiberBike (talk) 18:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I disagree in that one is still referring to a specific institution when speaking of the Society, so it's not general. Not capitalizing bull, well, I'm fine with that, because it's just a lot of bull. Daniel the Monk (talk) 19:42, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I see that the Society of Jesus article sometimes capitalizes and sometimes doesn't. The examples given at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Institutions use lower case for university or city even where it is clear that they are speaking of a specific institution. Another place to go for clarification is to featured articles to see how it was done there. I looked at Georgetown University and see that they don't capitalize university except in the full name (but it's not fully consistent). Does that persuade you? The Society of Jesus article should be made consistent too. SchreiberBike (talk) 20:33, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Hmmm, to be honest, it doesn't convince me. I'm so used to the practice in Catholic literature of the Society always being capitalized. Perhaps it depends on context. I'll have to think on that. Consistency is a good goal, but remembering the old adage of lots of cooks and pots, I'm not going to lose sleep over it. Daniel the Monk (talk) 02:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring at San Juan Bautista de Corias[edit]

Please see the result of WP:AN3#User:Srnec reported by User:Daniel the Monk (Result: Warnings, protection), which contains a warning for you. The steps of WP:Dispute resolution are open to you when you have a two-person disagreement and it appears that consensus can't be reached. Continued warring is harmful to the encyclopedia. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 13:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31[edit]

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.

Aldegonde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Nord
Eugene V. Clark (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Parish Council
Orderic Vitalis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Vitalis

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Benedict the Moor, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Moor and Congregation of the Holy Ghost (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) 14:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Meetup NYC this Sunday April 14[edit]

Hi Daniel the Monk! You're invited to our next meeting for Wikipedia Meetup NYC on Sunday April 14 -this weekend- at Symposium Greek Restaurant @ 544 W 113th St (in the back room), on the Upper West Side in the Columbia University area.

Please sign up, and add your ideas to the agenda for Sunday. Thanks!

Delivered on behalf of User:Pharos, 17:51, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Why did you remove the citation request tag[edit]

At [6]. Please tell me which source is the citation for the part of the text preceding the now-removed citation tag. PS. Also, why did you remove the diacritics from Czesław Miłosz's name? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

I removed the tag because the sentence already cites a specific document, which, in fact, has its own entry. As to the diacritics, if you look at the images of his English-language books, he did not use them in his works in this language. Daniel the Monk (talk) 14:58, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
An existence of a Wikipedia article does not satisfy WP:V. Hence, the section is uncited. The fact that a a book may used simplify spelling does not change the fact that on Wikipedia we use the correct spelling variants, i.e. the one where an article is at. You are welcome to start a move request at Czesław Miłosz, but until such a time that it succeeds the correct name for him as used on this project is the one with diacritics. Similarly, if you were to cite a Korean source about American history, you would write about George Washington, not 조지 워싱턴, despite the fact that the Korean language source would use the latter version. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:12, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
You are ignoring the fact that, in this case, as a resident and citizen of the United States, this is how he rendered his name in English. I have looked at the various English-language sources quoted here about him, and none of the journals and books in English use the Polish form, which he must have dropped upon gaining citizenship. So it not a matter of my changing it, it is how he used it, which is different than the example you give.
In this matter, I was simply rendering the name as given in the source. You have have raised an interesting point about the spelling in the entire article, since the MOS is that a name be rendered as most commonly used in English-language sources. I wonder what result that would have. Daniel the Monk (talk) 02:19, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
It's a dead horse issue, and you are welcome to start a WP:RM at CM page to prove me wrong. He never officially changed his name, and unless you can prove otherwise, diacritics are the correct use. PS. While there is inconsistency (no diacritics on the cover of [7]), note that they are used on page 2 in the copyright and LoC catalog sections. Throughout the book CM himself prefers just the not helpful C.M. initials. Authority control: Worldcat - uses diacritics, VIAF - ditto, LOC - ditto, DNB - I'll let you guess. So, dead horse, please stop staring at the carcass and move on :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:11, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I beg to differ that it's a dead issue, though I see you have a history of insisting of Polish accentuation. I shall grant that the case is muddy because he probably used both forms, but the issue is his use in the English language, and for that I do not have to prove that he changed his name, because as an American citizen his legal name would be the name on his citizenship papers, or do you dispute that he did become one? The American government, certainly in that period, did not use foreign accent marks for names, especially non-Western ones. Given how the English-language sources do not generally use them, the proof would be on you to prove that somehow he was able to keep the accent marks as part of his legal name. Evidence that he did not use Polish accentuation in his English writings can be seen here from his lifetime from the school where he lived and taught for many years.[1]
Given the ambiguity of the matter, I am not inclined to insist that the entry be changed, but I do feel that his own practice when writing in English, as an American citizen, should be respected and the MOS followed. Daniel the Monk (talk) 21:47, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Few points to consider: 1) did he ever renounce Polish citizenship? 2) in 1993 he returned to Poland 3) did he stop publishing books in Polish, or not? 4) were his works in Polish with English translations, vice versa, or both? 4) It is obvious his original name used diacritics, I think the burden is on you to prove his American ID did not have them 5) a major issue is as follows: did he stop using diacritic of his own will, or was he forced to not use them on occasion due to their technical unavailability in some locations, and due to foreigners slighting him and not using them when writing about him? Just a few points, but as you say, perhaps we should just stop discussing this, if it would be just for the sake of discussion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:12, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Infobox question[edit]

Hi Daniel,

I have been starting a series of articles on White Fathers missionaries in East Africa lately. I am not sure the best way to fill in the "Infobox Christian leader". Jan Cornelius van Sambeek is an example. I am inclined to give his main title as "Titular Bishop of Tracula", since he held that title until he died, then to list his more tangible positions under "Other posts". But I would also like to show his predecessors and successors in these posts in the infobox. Do you have any views on what is most appropriate? Maybe an example?

Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 02:42, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Aymatth. Thanks for asking. Most infoboxes use a bishop's actual working post as his major title. Actually, in this case, Van Sambeek ceased to be a titular bishop once he became the Ordinary of Kigoma. Other posts are given going back in time, so the most recent is listed first. Had he still been a Vicar Apostolic, that would be the title to list. Hope this helps. Daniel the Monk (talk) 13:55, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, that does help. I would prefer the approach used by template:infobox officeholder where a series of posts can be listed, each with title / start / end / predecessor / successor. But changing template:Infobox Christian leader seems impossible. I will follow the convention you describe. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
No problem. I would just point out that Mgr. is not the formal title for a bishop in the English-speaking world. His title would be the Right Rev., and adding the intials of his society, W.F., after his name is proper. Daniel the Monk (talk) 14:19, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
I have tweaked the Jan Cornelius van Sambeek infobox to make his last active post the main one, and list the other posts in reverse sequence. I added the suffix M. Afr., which is the formal name of the society and what seems to usually be used. I am not comfortable with the Right Reverend. That seems to be used in Britain but "Most Reverend" is used elsewhere by English speakers. The sources do not use either, but sometimes use "Mgr. van Sambeek". When in doubt, leave it out. (I also have difficulty calling a politician The Right Honourable!) I will work through and standardize the other articles in this set. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 14:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
I try to keep styles as used during the lifetime of the subject of the entry. W.F. is what the Missionaries of Africa used in English during that period. As regards, Most vs. Right, since Van Sambeek worked in a British territory, the usage there would be the appropriate one. It helps to know that it was used universally in the Catholic Church, except for Ireland, until the United States adopted it in the 1970's. From my reading of the MOS, the infobox can show a formal title for informative purposes, so it can only help. Daniel the Monk (talk) 14:14, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
I certainly do not feel strongly. The title and text of the articles should use the common forms, but I assume an infobox can use more formal forms, even if they were not often used in practice. Given the backgrounds of the early White Fathers Vicars Apostolic, I imagine they thought of themselves as "Monsignor Abc, M. Afr." (I never see P.B. for Pères Blancs). They would probably have introduced themselves as "Monsignor Abc", and probably were called by others either "Bishop Abc" or "Monsignor Abc". The sources mostly use one of those forms. I think I will just leave it - but would have no problem if you want to add a prefix or change a suffix. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited François de Laval, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Montigny and Alaincourt (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) 15:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Poor Franciscan Sisters[edit]

Pirmasens was under the control of Bavaria in 1855 when the Poor Franciscan Sisters were organized there. The fact that it is not presently in Bavaria is not relevant to its categorization for 1855.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:36, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Source?Daniel the Monk (talk) 17:37, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
A quick look at the Times Atlas of World History, p. 216, clearly shows that Bavaria held a large section of area along the French border from 1815 on. The various maps at Kingdom of Bavaria also make this clear.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:03, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

Thanks for your many edits, I'm just wondering why you moved Minh Mạng to Minh Mang (emperor)? (see Choi Byung Wook Southern Vietnam Under the Reign of Minh Mạng (1820-1841) 2004 etc.) Is there another Minh Mang with the ạ removed? In ictu oculi (talk) 06:00, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

There is a game with that same name. Daniel the Monk (talk) 19:54, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Maria Innocentia Hummel may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:35, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 29[edit]

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.

Maria Innocentia Hummel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Cell
Order of Saint Paul the First Hermit (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Procurator

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

July 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jean-Gabriel Perboyre may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:26, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 17[edit]

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.

Luigi Orione (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Oratory
Marko Krizin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Kingdom of Croatia
Péter Pázmány (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Principality of Transylvania
Sisters of the Infant Jesus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Sisters of Providence

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 31[edit]

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.

Vincente de Valverde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Toledo and Native Americans
Discalced Mercerdarians (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Chapter
Jerónimo de Loayza (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Native Americans

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Hyphenation of a standard -ly adverb[edit]

Consensus, both within and outside Wikipedia. WP Manual of Style, WP:HYPHEN, sub-subsection 3, point says "A hyphen is not used after a standard -ly adverb (a newly available home, a wholly owned subsidiary) unless part of a larger compound (a slowly-but-surely strategy)." Happy editing! Chris the speller yack 11:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! As I've said elsewhere, the MOS does not make for light summer reading. Daniel the Monk (talk) 15:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Hermann Cohen (Carmelite)[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 12:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Precious[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

monasteries
Thank you for quality articles on monasteries and the people who dedicate their life to them, such as Hermann Cohen, for improvements, page moves to more precise names and for categories, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:58, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 578th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

I thank the giver of this prize for bestowing it and my Superiors for allowing me to be able to earn it. AMDG! Daniel the Monk (talk) 17:53, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 18[edit]

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.

Didacus of Alcalá (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Jubilee Year, Córdoba and Albaida
Montmajour Abbey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Hermitage and Holy Cross
10th arrondissement of Paris (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Saint-Vincent-de-Paul
Cathedral of St. John the Baptist (Paterson, New Jersey) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Diocese of Newark
Dan Duva (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to 1984 Olympics
Francesco Piranesi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Etruscan
Martin Adolf Bormann (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Tyrol
Shrine of St. Anthony (Boston) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Brookline

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:48, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25[edit]

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.

Congregation of St. Vanne (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Leopold, Nancy and Maurus
Jérôme le Royer de la Dauversière (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Cathedral of Notre-Dame, Hôtel-Dieu and Native Americans
Francis Schüssler Fiorenza (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Lyons and Fellowship
Yves Congar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Laypeople and Vatican
Aloys Grillmeier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Limburg
Hautvillers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Dom Perignon
Pierre-Paul Durieu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Yakima Valley
Saint-Pal-de-Mons (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bishop of New Westminster
Sisters of the Child Jesus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bishop of New Westminster

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

San Pietro in Vincoli[edit]

Hello
You moved this page recently, without much of an explanation. I've reverted the move (per WP:BRD) and opened a discussion here, if you wish to comment.
Regards, Moonraker12 (talk) 15:18, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup! Saturday October 5[edit]

Jefferson Market Public Library
Please join the Wikimedia NYC Meetup on October 5, 2013!
Everyone gather at Jefferson Market Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for education, museums, libraries and planning WikiConference USA.
--Pharos (talk) 21:38, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2[edit]

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.

Mariam Baouardy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Damascene, Epiphany and Palestinian
Catharine Burton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Boyton
Nicolò Albertini (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to O.P.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:20, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Patrick Keely 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:
  • ], [[County Tipperary]], then a part of the [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland]] (alternatively another source states it was [[County Kilkenny]], <ref name=keely/> on August 9, 1816,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:25, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9[edit]

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.

Einsiedeln Abbey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Hermitage and Evangelist
Patrick Keely (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Albany

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 16[edit]

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.

Charles Auguste Marie Joseph, Count of Forbin-Janson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Dubuque, Lorraine and Bishop of Montreal
Ferdinand von Hompesch zu Bolheim (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Grand Master, Rothenburg and Sulz
Seraphin of Montegranaro (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Mason and Questor
Mary O'Hara (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Knobber
Methodios I of Constantinople (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Syracuse
The Interior Castle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Mystic

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


What a terrible nuisance this Wikipedia user is. Please STOP removing the category, 'Members of the Dominican Order' from pages concerning figures who are obviously and patently members of the Dominican Order. Furthermore, you do not have any authority whatsoever to suggest that my edits to these articles constitute vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.239.58.13 (talk) 21:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

If you actually look at the category, it lists only friars of the Order. The parties in those articles are listed in their appropriate categories for their branch of the Dominican Order. Given this, your continued nonconstructive editing can be considered vandalism.
I would comment on your page if you had a profile, but since you hide behind your IP, it is not possible to know if you would even get the message. Daniel the Monk (talk) 22:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

The 'Members of the Dominican Order' category clearly contains a number of particular subcategories, each of which obviously has a more limited range of content. However, my edits pertained to the GENERAL list of Dominican figures which proceeds the more specific subcategories. The fact that this more general list appears to contain mostly friars is no good reason to necessarily conclude that Dominicans other than friars should be omitted. As for your accusation of 'nonconstructive editing', what reason would any individual have to necessarily assent to your subjective judgement upon what what constitutes 'nonconstructive editing'. Considering my assessment of the 'Members of the Dominican Order' category, I do not see any good reason to think that this constitutes 'nonconstructive editing'. Moreover, I am finding your interference to be singularly nonconstructive. The reason why I limit my involvement in Wikipedia, and therefore do not have a profile, is exactly because of this sort of silliness, ie, that I cannot operate without pointless impediment.

You clearly miss the point and rules of editing in this site. This is what makes your editing non-constructive. Perhaps it is best, then, that you limit your editing. The subcategories automatically are part of the greater category. All editors bring their viewpoint to the site, subject to the established guidelines for editing. If you wish to create a new category, to clarify that it is one for the friars, be my guest. Daniel the Monk (talk) 22:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
No, I am sorry; you are not grasping my point. As for the 'rules of editing', you are not qualifying or clarifying which rules I am violating, and how. I am simply honouring the democratic nature of the site. I can only repeat that there is NO good reason that one should accept your judgement on my editing - you merely maintain that it is non-constructive because you happen to think it is non-constructive, and that in some vague way (according to your subjective prejudice and interpretation), I am missing the point of the rules. Moreover, there is no good reason (and you have certainly not provided one) to conclude that my edits are non-constructive. Your suggestion that I should limit my editing is as fatuous and unauthoritative as if I were to tell you to limit your editing. The point about the subcategories, which I CLEARLY made above, is that they distinguish between the particular and the general; they are limited in content according to type (sisters, scholars, etc). The fact that the figures in these particular categories might also appear in the general list of members is irrelevant. Your point that 'The subcategories automatically are part of the greater category' is also irrelevant: the greater category is divided into two distinct parts, a group of particular subcategories, and a general list of members. In addition to the reasons I have just stated, I maintain that my inclusion of Dominican women in the general category (the list beneath the subcategories) is perfectly legitimate and correct. Firstly, because there is no indication (a title, subtitle, etc) that this list (the general list, distinct from the subcategories) is exclusively for friars. Secondly, the title for the general list is clearly 'Members'. Do you agree that, in the context of the Order, the term 'member' is more inclusive than the term 'friar'? If so, do you also agree that this inclusive term might also pertain to Dominican women, such as Blessed Columba and Mother Ekaterina Abrikosova? Finally, I do not wish to create a new subcategory. Here, you appear to be contradicting yourself: if it is necessary to create a further subcategory to qualify 'friars and only friars' - for the very reason that one would make the distinction clear - your earlier remark that, 'If you actually look at the category, it lists only friars of the Order' is incorrect. Your contention was that my edits were nonconstructive because I was adding Dominican women to a part of the general category reserved for friars. Of course, if this were true, there would be no point in creating a qualified subcategory.

I can only repeat that the edits that I made to the 'Members' category should remain, and that you should stop interfering where you have no good reason to interfere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.239.58.13 (talk) 13:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Pointing out the specific editing guidelines is pointless, unless you agree to respect them, which I suspect you won't. Daniel the Monk (talk) 02:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
What an utterly pathetic, obnoxious reply! Considering that you have not (due to unwillingness or, as I strongly suspect, inability) explained how and why my edits are non-constructive, and that I have repeatedly explained why there is NO good reason to think that these edits are non-constructive, the reasonable and appropriate think for me to do at this point would be to reverse your interferences in the edits. Besides, why don't you actually engage honourably with the issue at hand, rather than resorting to argumentum ad hominem silliness, such as claiming that discussion is invalid because I am not or will not be respectful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.239.58.13 (talk) 10:24, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello there. Belated apologies for becoming irate over such a trivial matter. 92.239.58.13 (talk) 21:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Greenwich Village In The 60s" Editathon! Saturday November 2[edit]

Jefferson Market Public Library
Please join Wikipedia "Greenwich Village In The 60s" Editathon on November 2, 2013!
Everyone gather at Jefferson Market Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for Greenwich Village articles on the history and the community.
--Pharos (talk) 21:31, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1[edit]

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.

Isidore De Loor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Blessed and Bevern
St. Joachim's Church (Manhattan) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Cherry Street and Park Row
Catherine Slip (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to South Street
Catherine of Ricci (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Patrician

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:01, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 9[edit]

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.

Solanus Casey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Faculty and Penitentiary
Chelles Abbey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Lowlands

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 16[edit]

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.

St. Vincent de Paul Church (Manhattan) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Metropolitan Opera House and French Hospital
James Joseph Daly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Dean

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 23[edit]

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.

Henri Depelchin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Namur
John Morris (Jesuit) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Church History
Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mercy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Scudo
Pope Urban VIII (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Francesco Barberini
Rose Philippine Duchesne (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Convent of the Sacred Heart
Teodolfo Mertel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to St. Ives

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 30[edit]

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.

Mother Ignatius Hayes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to O.P., Convert and Second Order
Mary Magdalen Bentivoglio (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to West Coast and Steamer

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon" at Queens Library! Friday December 6[edit]

Queens Library
Please join Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon on December 6, 2013!
Everyone gather at Queens Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for borough articles on the history and the communities.
Drop-ins welcome 10am-7pm!--Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

Saturday: NYC Art And Feminism Wikipedia Editathon[edit]

Jefferson Market Public Library
Please join Wikipedia "Art and Feminism Editathon" @ Eyebeam on Saturday February 1, 2014,
an event aimed at collaboratively expanding Wikipedia articles covering Art and Feminism, and the biographies of women artists!

There are also regional events that day in Brooklyn, Westchester County, and the Hudson Valley.
--Pharos (talk)

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon[edit]

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon
ArtAndFeminismNYC-Generations.jpg

You are invited to join upcoming Wikipedia "Editathons", where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on a selected theme, on the following two Saturdays in March:

I hope to see you there! Pharos (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Payo Enríquez de Rivera, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Castile (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) 09:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Cistercians[edit]

Hello, Daniel! I wonder if you are watching the article on Cistercians. A few days ago, another editor and I were discussing something on the Talk page of the article under the heading "Constitution and Rule". Neither of us is an expert, and we were hoping someone would be able to address the issue we were discussing, but a few days have passed and no one has commented. Perhaps you might be able to help. Besides a question of capitalization in a section heading, there seems to be a disconnect between the section heading and the content of the section. CorinneSD (talk) 01:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Why is Benedictine nunneries inaccurate, whereas Benedictine monasteries of nuns is not?[edit]

Hi Daniel,
I saw your reversion back to the longer category name using a paraphrase instead of the term nunneries and wondered, why the shorter version is inaccurate?
Best wishes
Ulf Heinsohn (talk) 05:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Hello, Ulf. While the term nunnery might have been the common term in the 15th century, in modern English, especially in the U.S.A., it is considered somewhat pejorative, reminiscent of the anti-Catholic terminology of that era. I have been meaning to have the category deleted, but there are only so many hours in the day to get around to making all the changes. So thanks for giving me the incentive. Daniel the Monk (talk) 11:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Nunneries or monasteries of nuns[edit]

Hi Daniel,
thanks for the answer. I cannot judge whether nunnery is a negative term or not, but a short search in the Catalog of the Library of Congress delivers not a single title containing monastery of nuns, some having monasteries of nuns (the latest published in 1963, others having it as a keyword from the early 1980s, and older), but in the same time many titles using the term nunnery, the latest from the late 1980s, one on a nunnery in Montreal, Canada. Saying nunnery was accurate in the 15th century, but not later, does not make sense, since there are many titles from 19th and 20th century using it, for sure not all, and I guess not even mostly, in an anti-Catholic attitude. I think judging nunnery as pejorative needs more evidence, before using the paraphrase.
One title, also for sure no base for a generalisation but showing the width of usage, uses even monasteries and nunneries as a juxtaposition, as if monastery were rather one of monks, as opposed to nunneries. Is there any conclusion among wikipedians banning nunnery is discriminatory? Otherwise I do not see a basis for replacing the plain term nunnery, but suggest a parallel usage.
Best wishes
Ulf Heinsohn (talk) 11:04, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

I've hardly ever heard the word "nunnery" used, and I've always taken "monastery" to mean a place where monks live and work. The word for the place where nuns live and work is a convent, and I don't understand why you are not using it. I don't know what the connotation for "nunnery" has been in the 19th and 20th centuries, but the sound of the word is not pleasing. It parallels the sound of words such as "creamery", "brewery", and "tannery", all places where things are produced. CorinneSD (talk) 17:25, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Ulf, I have no idea what the contexts are of the listings you are looking at. Are you saying that there is an community of nuns in Canada which uses this term in their formal name? I think it is worth noting what outsiders who are not familiar with monastic terminology use should not be given the same weight as what the nuns themselves use. As an example, there is a Poor Clare monastery listed here which the locals would call an abbey, even though the nuns of that Order have NEVER used that term for their houses. Likewise, there is no community of nuns which officially calls its house a nunnery.
So perhaps monastery of nuns as a title will not show up, as such, since the operative word is simply monastery. Did you check the listings to confirm that they all referred only to monks? Corinne hits the nail on the head with its resonance. In this case, I would add "popery", which is definitely considered an anti-Catholic term.
My main point, however, is that nunnery is not, and actually has never been, so far as I can tell, a formal title. Given that, it seems preferable, following Wiki's guidelines, to use the formal term actually in use. By the way, if you look at the category of nunneries, it gives monastery as its main article.
Corinne, it's a bit complicated. Houses of nuns and what are now called Religious Sisters were always called monasteries or abbeys until the 16th century, when it became common in France to use the term convent for non-Benedictine nuns, especially the Carmelites. It gets very cloudy in German and Scandinavian languages, which usually simply use the term "Kloster", irrespective of the distinctions which are made in the Latin languages. In modern usage, when working in English and the Romance languages, all communities of nuns, i.e., those who follow the contemplative life, call their houses monasteries, while convent is used for houses of Religious Sisters, who follow active lives of service. Daniel the Monk (talk) 23:48, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Goliard[edit]

Hello, Daniel -- I wonder if you could take a look at a section of an article. The article is Goliard, and the section is Goliard#Debate over authorship and recent scholarship. I've made a few edits (see also my exchanges with User talk:Rothorpe#Goliard), but there is one sentence that we feel is confusing. It appears to be unsourced, and Rothorpe suggested removing it, but I can see that the entire section is paraphrased from a book listed at the bottom of the article by Gillingham. There are no in-line citations giving title and/or page numbers, however, and perhaps there should be. The sentence is the second-to-last sentence in the second paragraph of the section:

"Certain monastic orders were also less strict than others because of the forced monastic way of living, such as the Benedictine monks at Cluny."

If we remove this sentence, then the next sentence would make no sense. Whoever added this sentence was trying to make a point, but the point is not clear.

If you think the sentence is important, could you try to make it clearer? If you think it is not important, it can be deleted, but then you have to decide what to do with the next sentence.

I don't know if you can add in-line citations, or not. The entire section seems a bit long relative to the rest of the article, doesn't it? CorinneSD (talk) 16:17, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Corinne, thanks for your confidence in my editing skills. I've rearranged the sentence slightly and dropped that last phrase, which, as you note, is very unclear. I've also requested a citation for the reference to the Cluniacs for other reasons. See if you feel that it helps the article. Peace. Daniel the Monk (talk) 15:07, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Sunday August 17: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share[edit]

Sunday August 17: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the the Wikimedia NYC community for our upcoming wiki-salon and knowledge-sharing workshop on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

2pm–5pm at Yeoryia Studios at Epic Security Building, 2067 Broadway (5th floor).

Afterwards at 5pm, we'll walk to a social wiki-dinner together at a neighborhood restaurant (to be decided).

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 15:57, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

August 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "<>"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:
  • } Today, he continues as President of FUNDECI, which operates in several departments in Nicaragua.<ref name = ONU /<ref>[http://www.cinu.org.mx/onu/estructura/GA_BIO_Spanish_sm.pdf "Excmo. Sr. Padre
  • ]</ref> In 1985 the pope denounced him and two other priests, brothers [Ernesto Cardenal|Ernesto]] and [[Fernando Cardenal]], who all served in the Nicaraguan government, because they did not

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:56, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael O'Connor (bishop), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages S.J. and Bishop of Philadelphia. 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) 08:55, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Where are you?[edit]

You haven't added any comments to your talk page in three weeks. I hope all is well and that you're enjoying the summer. I wanted to ask you something about a recent edit to Cistercians, but since you don't seem to be around, I'll ask someone else, or maybe the edit will just be undone by someone watching the article. CorinneSD (talk) 00:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Corinne. Thanks for thinking of me. I hope your summer is going well. As my period of convalescence winds up, my duties in the Order seem to multiply. So I don't have too much time for editing. Do you still need help with that article? Daniel the Monk (talk) 11:57, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Daniel! I'm sorry to learn that you have been under the weather. I hope you're feeling better now. Another editor took care of the problem in the article. Thanks. I hope you keep editing on Wikipedia whenever you have time. -- CorinneSD (talk) 22:26, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I hope you are enjoying what is left of the summer. If you have time, would you review today's edit to Cistercians? An IP editor removed a line from the article, with an edit summary, but no source other than another Wikipedia article was provided to back up the statement in the edit summary. What do you think? CorinneSD (talk) 23:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your good wishes, Corinne. I hope you had a great summer. I looked at the article. If I understand the edit correctly, the editor removed reference to the Certosa di Pavia as a major Cistercian house. Even though they currently occupy that monastery, given their very limited historical connection to the site, I wouldn't object to that edit. Daniel the Monk (talk) 04:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
O.K. Thank you for looking at it. I completely trust your judgment. CorinneSD (talk) 12:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Maximilian Kolbe[edit]

I see you were one of the major contributors to this article. I am currently finishing a rewrite, and I hope to nominate this for WP:GAN. One of my major weaknesses is that I am not an English speaker, so the article could use some copy editing. I am also not an expert on Christian topics, so I'd appreciate if a person more familiar with this area could ensure any terminology and such is correct. Would you be able to help? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for considering me for reviewing your edit. Looking at the text briefly, I haven't seen a huge difference so far. There are a number of violations of the English MOS and I shall edit those when I can. Some have already been corrected by other editors. Daniel the Monk (talk) 02:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Category:Roman Catholic Religious Brothers[edit]

Category:Roman Catholic Religious Brothers, 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. Elizium23 (talk) 21:27, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Capitalisation principles[edit]

Can you please stop capitalising words when they are not part of a proper noun or a proper name. Only words which are part of a proper noun or name should be capitalised in contemporary English. It is, therefore, incorrect to write "his Order" instead of "his order". It is also incorrect to write "Master's degree" instead of "master's degree". And there is no "American" capitalisation style in such matters ~ the contemporary style principles for capitalisation are universal in English language countries. The fact that some organisations, such as universities, might write "the University" instead of "the university" when writing about their institution in their own publications is an idiosyncratic style which has no relevance to the standard style as used in Wikipedia articles. See MOS:INSTITUTIONS for guidance on these principles. Thank you. Afterwriting (talk) 03:24, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Regarding usage of Infobox Christian leader in Benedict Groeschel article.[edit]

There is no parameter called type = priest in Infobox religious biography. Please read the documentation before reverting. --Jayarathina (talk) 05:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vincenzo Santucci, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Consistory. 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) 09:15, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Missionary Sisters of the Immaculate Conception, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Canton. 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) 08:59, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Roman Catholic Diocese of Sora-Cassino-Aquino-Pontecorvo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vincentians. 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) 09:57, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Thursday December 4: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share[edit]

Thursday December 4: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the the Wikimedia NYC community for our upcoming wiki-salon and knowledge-sharing workshop in Manhattan's Greenwich Village.

6:30pm–8pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Afterwards at 8pm, we'll walk to a social wiki-dinner together at a neighborhood restaurant (to be decided).

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 07:11, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Category:Vincentian martyrs[edit]

Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_November_27#Category:Vincentian_martyrs. – Fayenatic London 12:47, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ [8]