User talk:Dimadick

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


Nohat-logo-XI-big-text.png This user is one of the 400 most active Wikipedians of all time.

Objective criteria for episode notability[edit]

I've attempted to synthesize the discussion. Again, feedback welcome.Kww (talk) 18:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Updated DYK query On 16 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Constantina, wife of Maurice, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Victuallers (talk) 13:10, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


Adminship Thanks for the thought (I know it was also kind of tongue in cheek referring to the number that had to be patrolled) but of course I was suggested for adminship well over a year and a half ago and I turned it down although I could use some of the admin tools certainly. I've put in ten times more edits that many admins on here, but I prefer to contribute purely encyclopedically and not get too tied down with debates and administrative which often makes me feel bad about wikipedia when some people are uncivil etc, I'm sure you know what I mean! i find it silly that nobody will flag my account given my contributions -it would save new page patrol a lot of work!! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 19:18, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Archiving Your Talk Page[edit]

Would you like me to archive your talk page?--TrUCo9311 20:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

If you can, do it. I am not sure of the needed process. Dimadick (talk) 20:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done.TrUCo9311 20:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Sophia, wife of Justin II[edit]

Updated DYK query On 4 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sophia, wife of Justin II, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 11:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Greece[edit]

You have added the Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece template to talk pages for (1) articles about non-Greek entities that have Greek-derived names and (2) articles that mention or discuss the Greek language derivation of certain English words, but that otherwise appear to have nothing to do with Greece. Do you have reason to think that Fear of youth, Ephebophilia, Orpheion, and Omophagia belong in this wikiproject, or were these automated edits? (There may be other examples like these...) --Orlady (talk) 13:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually I have added articles that were already in Category:Ancient Greece or disambiguation pages included within. The category and its contents are relevant to thw WikiProject which also covers the Greek language. Dimadick (talk) 13:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

  • On that basis, I see the value of keeping Orpheion and Omophagia in that wikiproject. Fear of youth and Ephebophilia probably got included due to a link from a page related to the root word Ephebos. I see no reason for Wikiproject Greece to need (or want) to fool with these articles, so I removed the Wikiproject templates. --Orlady (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Euphemia, wife of Justin I[edit]

Updated DYK query On 6 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Euphemia, wife of Justin I, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 11:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Electoral histories[edit]

Hi there, I see that you have been editing many of the same pages that User:Darth Kalwejt has. I have a question regarding your views on "Electoral history" sections on politicans pages, information that Darth Kalwejt has added to just about every American politician Wikipedia article. Do you support them, and do you support their formats (there are many different formats, but do you support any?)? I suppose they could be beneficial in certain instances, but I am largely opposed to how they are currently being used and presented (see my comments here). Anyway, I'm just curious as to what you think; a reply would be very helpful. Thanks, Happyme22 (talk) 06:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't care much for them. They seem to be mostly duplicating information from other articles. I am just correcting misspelling of names. Dimadick (talk) 06:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay thanks for your reply. I've been trying to contact Dath Kalwejt but he hasn't responded. Thanks again, Happyme22 (talk) 17:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Crusades task force[edit]

Hi Dimadick, I notice you've been adding a lot of WPMA templates; I've just created a Crusades task force as part of the Middle Ages WikiProject, so if you'd like to help with that as well, that would be great! Adam Bishop (talk) 09:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I have been adding the templates for quite a while now because it seems to be the only way to get the articles noticed. I df the new task force can get some Crusade articles noted, why not. Dimadick (talk) 07:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Floris III, Count of Holland[edit]

Noticed you added a WikiProject Middle Ages project banner in the article talk. But in the other projects, the article has been rated start class. But you did not assess it. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 07:14, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

The Medieval Wikiproject has its own assesment criteria and does not necessarily follow the bio assesments. Dimadick (talk) 07:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toni Ann Gisondi[edit]

You voted to keep this article based in part on an award win. Just wanted to make it clear that the article was poorly worded and the actor was merely nominated for the award, in case this makes a difference to your vote. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 15:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


You might add the $$visual arts}} tag to those articles like illuminated manuscripts where it applies and has not yet been added. We don't do much tagging, although we are more active in maintaining these articles. Thanks, Johnbod (talk) 13:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I was unaware that project also covered manuscripts. Dimadick (talk) 13:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Talk:Blacasset[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

A tag has been placed on Talk:Blacasset, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Talk:Blacasset|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Hot200245 (talk) 14:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


I'm fairly sure it is a mistake to all Project Judaism tags to Christian Old Testament manuscripts that have no textual interest for Jews. However, as mentioned before, the Visual arts tag is an appropriate addition. Johnbod (talk) 10:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I have added mEdieval but bot Judaism tags to the various manuscriptsDimadick (talk) 10:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I was talking about Old Testament fragment (Naples, Biblioteca Vittorio Emanuele III, 1 B 18), but I see you are right - you added WPMA, someone else the Judaism. Both in fact are wrong, as this is a late Antique 5th century MS, as are several others you have added the WPMA tag to. Please use edit summaries btw. Just "+WPMA" would be fine. Thanks. Johnbod (talk) 11:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually this is the only project so far which has dealt with the Roman and Byzantine articles of the 5th century. So I don't consider it a mistake. Dimadick (talk) 11:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

How "dealt with" (other than by tagging)? Some of these have the "classical Greece and Rome" banners, and the main contributor to them by far is User:Dmsgold who is not affiliated with either project, probably followed by myself, who is in both. Johnbod (talk) 11:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Dealt with in assessing and/or preventing vandalism mostly. For some reason "Classical Greece and Rome" has not included several articles on Roman figures of the period of the Theodosian dynasty or their successors in the Eastern Roman Empire and the Western Roman Empire. The situation dealing with the 476 - 500 period is not that clear. Dimadick (talk) 11:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Succession boxes[edit]

Hello. According to this succession boxes should be about the last thing on the page. I am not a great fan of consistency for its own sake, but in this case I think it would be as well if everything was done the same way. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

However this renders them practically invisible in articles with long list of references. I consider them more useful at the end of the actual text. Dimadick (talk) 10:28, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

New Project[edit]

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 17:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Queen Zein[edit]

Hello, Dimadick! Could you please give your opinion at Talk:Queen Zein al-Sharaf Talal#Requested move? Thank you! Surtsicna (talk) 14:47, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

List of Byzantine Emperors[edit]

The tables in this article repeat the row which include Picture, Name, Status etc. parameters as headings in both top and at the bottom of each table. Can you please fix it? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 09:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus (consul 32)[edit]

Hallo, Dimadick! I'm hoping you can help me. The page on G. Domitius Ahenobarbus (consul 32) gives his date of birth as 11th December 17 BC. But where did this date come from? No source is given. I don't know who wrote the original page, but I notice that you've taken an active part in the discussion, so maybe you could advise me. Thanks, Larmel (talk) 12:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The date seems to come from "Suetonius' Life of Nero:An Historical Commentary" (1978) by Keith R. Bradley. Dimadick (talk) 15:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Estonian Government in Exile[edit]

Hi Dimadick, I noticed that you included Estonian Government in Exile under WikiProject Former Countries. It might be me that I'm missing something but how does it make sense? Thanks! --Termer (talk) 13:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

You are missing that the project even has a task force devoted "to articles on extraordinary governments, such as provisional governments or governments-in-exile". Dimadick (talk) 17:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


Gross oversight on my part on the AD/BC mess! Thanks. Prashanthns (talk) 15:53, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

About Constantine[edit]

Recently you have added king Constantine I of Greece in the category of Greek people of World I... I do not thing should be there, since he wasn't Greek. Yes he was born in Athens but his line is not Greek (Glücksburg). I will remove him from the category for now... If you disagree please post your opinion in the talk page of Constantine I of Greece. Thank you in advance. A.Cython (talk) 13:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for this, i'am spanish wikipedian and Latins should be like it:Latini and es:Latinos (es:Latinos was translated from it:Latini), Shooke (talk) 00:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject tagging[edit]

You've just tagged Diameter, Dolphin and Dissertation as being part of Wikiproject Greece, despite the fact that these have nothing whatsoever to do with Greece. Please stop inappropriately categorising articles like this. Hut 8.5 17:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

They are included in category Greek loan words and the Project also covers the Greek language. Dimadick (talk) 17:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

That's not a sufficiently strong connection to tag the article's talk page. Only do it if the article has a strong connection to the Wikiproject. Hut 8.5 17:50, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Theodora Kantakouzene[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on Theodora Kantakouzene requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. – moonty (talk) (contribs) 09:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Apologies for what was probably an incorrect speedy deletion. To avoid such problems in the future (though I'll be a bit more careful), read Wikipedia:Starting_an_article#How_to_create_a_page. – moonty (talk) (contribs) 10:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

About your Wikiproject tagging again[edit]

I came here because I had concerns about your Wikiproject tagging, although apparently User:Hut 8.5's already dropped a similar note, but I do want to add my voice to his/hers. I've seen you popping up across the spectrum of my watchlist for some time now, and while I admire your dedication and diligence, I have to say that I think your tagging is indiscriminately broad, which greatly reduces its helpfulness to the projects involved. Adding everything with any kind of relation to classicism, no matter how remote or in what minor proportion, is not what those tags are for. When you find yourself tagging things like World's Finest Team as being supported by Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece, Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome and Wikipedia:WikiProject Mythology, you have ventured into a categorical inclusiveness that compromises the value of those tags in the first place. I urge you to exercise a greater selectiveness, particularly in cases of modern fictional characters that are related to or in some way based on classical myth. Namorita shouldn't be tagged for Wikiproject Greece any more than Lex Luthor should be tagged for WikiProject United States presidents because he won an election in a comic book. Thanks. Ford MF (talk) 13:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

You seem under the impression that "classicist" means ancient. Much of the project articles actually include modern authors, artists and cultural depictions. In concepts as broad as depictions of Greco-Roman mythology there is little difference between sources and depictions. Did you even notice that "Namorita" is another depiction of the Atlantis myth? Dimadick (talk) 14:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, I mostly came because of the wholesale tagging of comics- and TV-mythology articles with templates for WP:GREECE, &c., so yeah, I'm aware there exists in the Marvel Universe a thing called "Atlantis". I'm willing to believe that these Wikiprojects may in fact be agreeable to the inclusion of derivative characters and works, legion though they may be, but your tagging does I think raise a legitimate question of scope. You didn't mention a rationale for World's Finest Team, although I presume it is the mere presence of Wonder Woman, and it makes one wonder how far down the ladder you're going to go, because that's pretty far down.
Mythological articles habitually accrue "trivia" or "in popular culture" sections that list myriad mentions of the subject in modern popular culture, but would manga like Spriggan (to pick one example) really need to be tagged for classical mythology merely because its characters use weapons of orichalcum? Ford MF (talk) 14:24, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, I am willing to believe I am in the minority in this regard, so I've posted a similar question on the talkpages of interested projects regarding their scope. Ford MF (talk) 14:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I'd also like to ask you to please stop the excessive project tagging. Every character of the Xena television series and every article in Xena does NOT belong in any of those projects. You seem to just be tagging without actually considering the article contents. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I echo the concerns of others. Stop tagging anything with a Greek or Roman name. Not everything tangentially connected to either empire needs be tagged that way, unless you also plan to tag all articles on democracy, republicanism, science, and so on. they've all got latin and greek name roots. ThuranX (talk) 15:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree with ThuraX and Collectonian. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:57, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Superheroes[edit]

Hey, this is Blackwatch21 from WikiProject Superheroes. I see that you have been putting our project banner, if you want you can join our project. Thanks. BW21.--BlackWatch21 16:44, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

When it comes to superhero articles I am more often a reader than an editor. But having some fresh eyes examining articles that have not seen many edits in more than a year is probably a good idea. Wish you luck with your new WikiProject. Dimadick (talk) 16:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

But you added our project banner to over 200 articles?--BlackWatch21 16:56, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Ancient Olympics Games[edit]

I noticed you answering some questions on the talk page here; are you knowledgeable about the games? And if so, can you tell me if this is accurate; if so it could lead to significant expansion of the article. Ironholds 15:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that the page is its lack of a list of its own sources and use of expressions such as "some scholars" which leaves the reasoning quite vague. I suggest finding more sources supporting a statement before incorporating it into an article. Dimadick (talk) 16:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks :). Ironholds 18:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Junta trials[edit]

Hi Dimadick. It's been a long time but it is nice to see you again and I would like to thank you for your support and your valuable contributions, as always, to the article. Take care. Tasos. Dr.K. (talk) 14:32, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Always nice to see interesting subjects covered in new articles. Good work, Tasos. Hope you can find enough time to work on your subjects of choice. Dimadick (talk) 16:21, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much Dimadick for your nice comments. I always try to write a few things that I care about and I am very pleased to get feedback from editors I hold in high esteem. I also appreciate your many contributions and great work in this area and even though it is the nature of editing here that sometimes we lose track of each other, it is always nice to see you again. Take care and all the best. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 21:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC))

Western Roman Empress consort[edit]

You have created this table in articles and so....

Placidia is not last Western Roman Empress consort but wife of Julius Nepos which is married to niece of Leo I. Procopius is even writing about Julius Nepos grandchild, but for me name of his wife is mistery !?--Rečanin (talk) 23:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Because it is a mystery for everyone. The name was never recorded to my knowledge and there is too little information about her. Whether she was a niece by Leo by blood or marriage is also unknown. Also unclear whether she was alive during the reign of her husband. Dimadick (talk) 09:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Onomatology of Byzantine Emperors[edit]

Hi Dimadick. I saw your efforts to revert the changes that Deipnosophista made to the Komnenos article. Thank you for that. I informed Yannismarou and Adam Bishop about the situation and requested a reversal of these unjustified, stealthy, misleading and counterproductive moves. If this is not resolved soon we must take further action. Please let me know about any ideas you may have. Thanks. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 04:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC))

Yannis, as usual, fixed it. I just left him a message about the others too. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 14:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC))

Category:Documentaries alleging war crimes[edit]

You had participated back in February in this CfD regarding the Category:Documentaries alleging war crimes, which ended in no consensus. A new proposal has been made to eliminate this category and merge its contents to Category:War documentaries which is now going on at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 September 24#Category:Documentaries alleging war crimes. You are encouraged to reconsider the original CfD, revisit your opinion in that discussion and participate again in this latest CfD. Alansohn (talk) 20:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, would you be good enough to take another look at the discussion? I hope you'll reconsider your !vote for merging in light of the comments I've added. Regards, Cgingold (talk) 12:17, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

A friendly reminder[edit]

Information.svg Edit summary reminder
Hello. I noticed that your edit to Saturn I did not include an edit summary. Please remember to use one for every edit, even minor ones. You can enable the wiki software to prompt you for one before making an edit by setting your user preferences (under Editing) to "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary". Thanks, -MBK004 18:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Collectonian and Lord S are AfD'ing an article from DBZ again[edit]

They didn't even notify the talk page where consensus was just reached, this really is reprehensible.


Please stop rating for the Visual Arts Project, of which you are not a member. I don't think you should rate for other projects where you are not a member & have no specific expertise either. Johnbod (talk) 15:19, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually I am only applying recent ratings of one relevant Wikiproject to the others. I consider it bettyer than leaving them unrated for a lengthier period.Dimadick (talk) 15:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Generally the VA view is that no ratings are better than Biography project drive-bys, so please don't. Johnbod (talk) 15:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I tend to ignore the biography project myself. I have encountered states and artifacts wrongly included in that project and given ratings. I meant the projects by country, more recently the German one who has been quite active in assessments. Dimadick (talk) 15:25, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


Please can you be more careful when adding WikiProject notices to articles. Firstly, Template:WikiProjectNotice-LSBY (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) is no longer in use, and is only retained because some pages have not yet been converted to the newer tag, which is {{WPSpace|TLS=yes}}. Secondly, most of the articles you have added this tag to are not in the scope of WP:TLS - of the twelve articles you have tagged today, the only one which should have been tagged was 1973 in spaceflight. The more generic {{WPSpace}} tag (without the TLS=yes parameter) should have been used in all other cases. Thanks. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 20:18, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Crime and poverty[edit]

Crime and poverty are indeed rated as major factors for mortality. I'm not sure if you were being serious or not on the CFD, but I found your comment slightly off the mark. Viriditas (talk) 16:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Julius Yemans Dewey[edit]

Thanks for expanding the article! --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 17:58, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I was working on expanding the George Dewey article recently and found some good references on his father. I think Julius was quite an interesting figure on his own right. I hope you find the article to your liking. Dimadick (talk) 18:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Greece)[edit]

Thank you very much for your contributions to Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Greece). As you can see is still under construction, I do have all the information, just need time to punch it in. Typically I do the wikilinking job at the end (after copy edit), but you have helped a lot.

If you do not mind, I can post you a note here when I add more information about the other coins.

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 00:48, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

FYI, I have finished adding all descriptions to the article. I am adding references now while a friend is doing the copy/edit. IF you have time and want to help, please feel free to wikilink the rest of the article. Many thanks in advance, Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

No content in Category:Settlements established in 744[edit]

Information icon.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Settlements established in 744, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Settlements established in 744 has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Settlements established in 744, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 06:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

List of First Ladies of the United States[edit]

Please do not add Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. List of First Ladies of the United States goes by what the White House and First Ladies Library says, that is all. If you would like to bring up why it doesn't include sisters, neices, daughters, you may wish to discuss it at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of First Ladies of the United States. Matthewedwards (talk contribs  email) 18:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Category:WikiProject Khitan articles by importance[edit]

Information icon.svg

I notice that this category is unpopulated (empty). In other words, no Wikipedia pages belong to (are members of) it. If it remains unpopulated for four days, it may deleted, without discussion, in accordance with Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#C1. I'm notifying you, the creator of the category, in case you wish to (re-)populate the category by adding [[Category:WikiProject Khitan articles by importance]] to articles/categories that belong there.

I have also blanked the category page. This will not, in itself, cause the category to be deleted. It serves to document (in the page history) that the category was empty at the time of blanking and also to alert other watchers that the category is in jeopardy. You are welcome to revert the blanking if you wish. However, doing so will not prevent deletion if the category remains empty.

--Stepheng3 (talk) 19:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Same thing with Category:1764 riots. --Stepheng3 (talk) 04:31, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Category:Rulers by century[edit]

I finished my expansion of the category you created. Any suggestions on how to improve the category? Dimadick (talk) 18:01, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Well the first thing you can do is do to go here and vote to have Category:21st-century former rulers merged into Category:21st-century national presidents.
  • Now looking at your work... this is awesome... I am not sure where to start, I see from your recent contributions you have added a lot of monarchs, mostly from Asia, mostly from the 11th to 18th century? Maybe you can tell me what else you have done so far.
  • I will tell you some as well.
  • I filled basicly by myself from about Category:7th-century BC rulers to Category:10th-century rulers. I forget where I left off on the BC side as you get records for fewer rulers each century, but basicly have 100% of the rulers up to the 10th-century. The category were then getting so big I knew I should begin breaking them up by area (I plan on Asia, Caribbean, South America, Oceania, Europe, Central America, North America, Africa, Middle East) from then on, and by type (monarchs, presidents, prime ministers, etc.) from about the 18th-century onward.
  • I wanted to have a sytem so that I planned in advance the category and could not have retag each article many times. I guess I spent most of the time since then (doing other projects and) dividing all the Heads of state by area. I know someone who has a bot that can divid up the names by century, and then all we would have to do is go down lists of articles and tag them.
  • Have you ever, by chance, used a bot?
  • In any case I have the them done already for the 21st century rulers here: User:Carlaude/Rulers#List_C.
  • I also have lists ready of rulers that could be recategorized by area here: User:Carlaude/Rulers#List_A. It is not really as high a priority but it would be nice to do especially if it could be done by bot. Carlaude:Talk 22:10, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
As I said, one of the simplist things you can do to "improve Category:21st-century national presidents" is go Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_July_16#Category:21st-century_former_rulers and vote to have Category:21st-century former rulers merged into Category:21st-century national presidents.
You can post a vote in just one sentence... Did you already add them all in already? I saw a lot were at one point. Carlaude:Talk 18:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Monarchs by century[edit]

I am not so sure that Category:10th-century monarchs, etc. are that useful as subcategories. Since most rulers in these centuries are monarchs-- until republics begin (again) in the 18th century-- nearly all the rulers would have to in these categories for them to be complete, and the rulers that are not monarchs would sometimes be hard to determine, since we may have very limited records of back then, and many titles are used of monarchs and non-monarchs. The cut-off doesn't have to be the 17th-century if there are some non-monarchs before then, but I was not sure you thought about this. Carlaude:Talk 22:26, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I never indicated they are were only monarchs, but there looks to be stilll at least 90%-95% monarchs-- and then someone could come along later and just propose in a CfD that it all be merged/deleted, each [Category:00th-century monarchs] into its parent [Category:00th-century rulers].
If you still want to include a [Category:Monarchs] within each [Category:Rulers] then I would still like to have us working together. Could we leave the non-monarchs together in the top category until a 18th-century or so? Having some ruler-types in small categories will greatly increase the chances that later someone will nominate all the categories to be all merged. Carlaude:Talk 11:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Dimadick (talk) 17:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I see your new Category:9th-century monarchs does show up with the first page of Category:9th-century rulers because Category:9th-century rulers has nearly 400 articles in it. This can be helped it articles are moved out of Category:9th-century rulers and into subcategories like Category:9th-century rulers in Asia or Category:9th-century monarchs in Asia, rather than just adding them to Category:9th-century monarchs.
You could also just add a blank before the sort key like this... [[Category:9th-century rulers| Monarchs]]. Carlaude:Talk 22:42, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

21st-century national presidents[edit]

I see you are doing thing with these categories but I don't understand why you avoid much of any communication. Do not want to do any working together?
The main thing I notice is you have added a couple hundred articles to Category:21st-century national presidents and/or Category:20th-century national presidents-- which is a good thing-- but the point of my efforts to indentify them by area, e.g. Europe, is that they can be entered directly into Category:21st-century national presidents in Europe or whatever. To enter them all into Category:21st-century national presidents and then later into Category:21st-century national presidents in Europe takes twice as many the edits. What do you think? Carlaude:Talk 22:29, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I placed the various 21st century presidents there because there was not a subacategory for them. I think I included everyone with an article. If you create subcategories, I can help with the edits needed to disambiguate them. Dimadick (talk) 07:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank for responding. I have created all the 21st century president sub-cats for ya.
Also still curous what else you have worked on that I just haven't seen yet? Carlaude:Talk 15:01, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
I have created various more such as 9th- to 14th-century monarchs in the Middle East, in Asia, and Chinese monarchs and the various more 20th century president sub-cats.
Just let me know where you will work and I can create categories for you, or at least sample ones. I don't want to create categories until one of us is planning to use or fill them soon after.Carlaude:Talk 22:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I was planning to work on Indian rulers for a while. Already covered the presidents and the Emperors from 1877 to 1947. Dimadick (talk) 03:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Okay, thanks. Looks like the categories you need are there. A couple points.
  • Please avoid putting a person in a "monarchs is Asia" etc. if they live in Europe-- in a non-conntected way, e.g. any of the UK monarchs over India. I think there may seen as Wikipedia:Overcategorization and reverted or an excuse to even toremove the categories all togther, as they are new. (these people would end up being monarchs "in" of every continent-- but I think still having leaders of Russia and Turkey rulers as rulers "in Asia" will make more sense to people.)
  • Also, it is not as usefull to have So-and-so's folder in these categories as to have So-and-so's article. In fact, if leave the people categories out, altogther that is prefered to me, but do include people articles.
  • There are a few categories of people here and there in the 1st- 12th-centuries that are each within a whole century-- these are good. (In fact in these cases I have not even put the people within in that century category, but you can if you want.) But there are a few categories in the 19th and 20th centuries that overlap centuries. I will try and remove them all tonight, but we do need to remove them, so they are not confused with the ones that can stay. We will also have to get rid of the caliph categories later, since they all overlap. It may be nice to set up "caliphs by century" categories. Carlaude:Talk 05:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Arsinoe IV of Egypt[edit]

Hi there. I see you have made an amendment to the article Arsinoe IV of Egypt, categorising her as a "female ruler". Arsinoe IV was undoubtedly female, but was she ever a ruler of anything at all? Wdford (talk) 14:58, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

She was rival queen in a civil war. Dimadick (talk) 14:59, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

She wasn't much of a rival, as history proved. She went off in a sulk, she attempted a coup without much support from anybody, and her own army sold her to the enemy. She never won the war, and never came to rule Egypt, or anywhere else. History remembers Cleopatra as the last ruler of Egypt, after her father. Does that really make Arsinoe a "ruler", or merely a spectacularly unsuccessful "wannabe"? Wdford (talk) 15:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

You'd be surprised to know hom many Roman emperors have no more claim to the title than she did. Dimadick (talk) 16:46, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

If they never ruled, then they were never rulers. Let's delete them all as well. Wdford (talk) 22:18, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:14th-century BC women[edit]

I have nominated Category:14th-century BC women (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Women from the 14th Century BCE (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Irbisgreif (talk) 23:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Byzantium articles[edit]

I'm trying my best to gradually build up the Byzantine Empire history series of articles, and your help after my writing is greatly appreciated. I intended to wikilink the prefectures when I started on the article again, but you've already done that for me! Thanks for your assistance, and for adding those project tags. Monsieurdl mon talk 22:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Marcellus (6th century AD)[edit]

Hello Dimadick! I have responded on Marcellus' identity at Talk:Marcellus (6th century AD), and await your reply. Best regards, Constantine 18:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

So it does need a disambiguation page. If you want to edit the Bury phrases. Do so freely. It is just the most detailed account of the events I have found. Dimadick (talk) 18:16, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

It is, and good old Bury was virtually the first serious work on Byzantium I ever read :) However if we include links to the text itself, IMO including entire passages is a bit redundant. We should summarize, like all encyclopedias. Anyhow, good work on these new articles, I am looking forward to more! Take care, Constantine 18:22, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Marcellus (6th century AD)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Marcellus (6th century AD) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

per Talk:Marcellus (comes excubitorum), implausible & misleading redirect. There were several Marcelluses in the 6th century, and the proper dab page for them is at Marcellus

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. Constantine 11:06, 11 March 2010 (UTC)


Hello! I have seen the German article, but they seem to mix up the Caesar, who acc. to the PLRE is only recorded once, for 582, with Germanus "the Patrician" of the later reign of Maurice. The PLRE however makes a clear case that the two are distinct. Other than that, the German article uses only the info from the PLRE entry. If you do not have access to it, I have a copy and can write the article up tomorrow. Cheers, Constantine 14:04, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, this does resolve why I could not find more references to the Caesar. I have information on his role in 582 but nothing before or after that. Dimadick (talk) 04:46, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Page for Byzantine-related new articles[edit]

Hello! I have created a list for new or recently de-stubbed articles that relate to the Byzantine Empire. I hope that everyone contributing on the subject will add his/her articles there, so that other interested users will be able to find it easily. BTW, I have tried to find all such articles for 2010, but some may have escaped my notice. If you find any missing, please add them yourself. Best regards, Constantine 13:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Domentziolus, the nephew[edit]

Ecxellent work on expanding and adding context to the article :)! Cheers, Constantine 19:32, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. The Prosopography typically offers the bare bones of any event mentioned. Its the context that gives them significance. Dimadick (talk) 19:36, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Ottoman people by century[edit]

Hi! You are welcome. I hope I don't make mistakes. Cheers. CeeGee (talk) 15:43, 17 April 2010 (UTC)


Try using this template as shown here next time. Thanks. şṗøʀĸɕäɾłäů∂ɛ:τᴀʟĸ 16:54, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Slav migrations[edit]

hI. The whole article needS re-writing with more recent theories. It Would need to be hugely magnified to go into the whoe debate whether 'homalands' exist or not, and where this is tO be found, and analyze the various cultural, political and demographic factors which led to a Slavic expansion. The old theory that Slavs just suddenly migrated accross half of Europe is simplistic Hxseek (talk) 00:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Turkish–Portuguese War (1509)‎[edit]

Hi Dimadick, could you please check the discussion about a possible merge with the battle of Diu? Regards --Kimdime (talk) 13:00, 19 April 2010 (UTC)


...for all the copy editing on Isabella of France. Greatly appreciated! Hchc2009 (talk) 17:04, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Romans and Visigoths[edit]

As regards this edit, should I put him in the "Romans" category even if he was a Visigoth? --TakenakaN (talk) 10:29, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

He served in the Roman army. If we exclude all Roman officers of barbarian or semi-barbarian origin, we end up without listing the majority of them in the 5th century. Problematic on itself. Dimadick (talk) 06:09, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Redaktor Wikipedia 600px.png

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 03:00, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


Hello. I see that you're currently tagging a number of articles as being part of the LGBT wikiproject. Why would Yennenga fall under that scope? There's nothing relevant to LGBT in the article.--BelovedFreak 13:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

LBGT stands for "lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender". Yennenga and other cross-dressers fit under the definition for transgender: "individuals, behaviors, and groups involving tendencies to vary from the usual gender roles.". Dimadick (talk) 13:22, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I realise what LGBT stands for, but I don't think that Yennenga would be classified as transgender just because she wore men's clothing as a disguise to escape her father. These categories and/or project tags can be controversial, and it's sometimes a good idea to discuss them first. I've not checked on all the other ones you've added, but please be aware of WP:BLP issues too, if you're adding the tag to BLPs. These "accusations" (and, yes: some people do see it that way) need to be scrupulously sourced. --BelovedFreak 13:25, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello, so I guess it looks like you don't really want to discuss this. I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies. Not that I think I'm right and you're wrong, but I would like some more input.--BelovedFreak 13:45, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

2nd Century Consuls[edit]

Dimadick, you have me at a loss. Why did you undo my corrected edit for the Roman consuls of the year 169 AD? As someone who appears to have significant knowledge of Roman naming convention, you are surely aware that the consuls for that year was several individual, not one massive block of a name? I am going to undo your edit, and remind you that names like Lucius, Aper, Gaius and sextus are praenomen not cognomen or nomen. Thank you. --I am the Blood 12:27, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


Hi Dimadick! I'm here to learn and hopefully you can send me in the right direction. I noticed that you changed the DEFAULTSORT on Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 10th Earl of Shaftesbury. Therefore, I'm thinking that you know a bit more about formatting them than I do. I was told that the order goes, SURNAME, (PREFIX) GIVEN NAME, SUFFIX, but then you changed it to place the suffix first. I keep seeing it so many different ways and it gets confusing. Can you direct me to the official formatting guidelines for the DEFAULTSORT? Try as I might, I've never been able to find it. Your help is appreciated. Thanks and have a great day! Cindamuse (talk) 18:02, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the feedback. ;) Cindamuse (talk) 19:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


Hi Dimadick. I see you've been adding WikiProject Boxes to talk pages. I would like to ask you to add {{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=no|1= around all the boxes when there are more than a few. This keeps those talk pages from becoming too cluttered. --JorisvS (talk) 12:59, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

WPGR tags[edit]

Hello Dimadick! Good work on tagging, but two requests. Please be a bit more careful with the WPGR tag, you've added it to quite a few irrelevant articles recently. Also, it would be good, since you already add the tags, to assess the articles as well and add the relevant parameters too. Cheers, Constantine 02:34, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

One of the main reasons I tag articles is to have editors with an interest on them actually viewing them. It would kind of beat the purpose if only I reviewed them and forgot about them. Dimadick (talk) 10:33, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Dimadick (talk) 07:07, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. However the tags are mostly for project maintenance, and reviewing them does not preclude any interested editor from reading them, either ;). As for the Judaeo-Italian languages, you are right, there is relevance. I've reverted the removal. However in many other cases, such as the Dené-Caucasian languages etc, I can't really see any connection. Best regards, Constantine 10:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)


Intriguing - I had always in my exposure to academic interpretations of history - I had always assumed Middle Ages was a euro-centric allocation - relative to the cultural sphere of Europe - do you have any good links that say they identify the label to un-related cultures (in that Java was hardly affected by the european influence till after) at all? SatuSuro 06:49, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Have you noticed the article History of Asia and its section "Middle Ages". What makes you think you thin the Project is eurocentric? Dimadick (talk) 06:52, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

To clarify - I have nothing to do with WPMA project - however if I look at the main article - it is very specific about its context.

South east asia is very different from the over-sided Asia category and its issues (of which I disagree very strongly as a grab bag for widely disparate cultural spheres) and would defend questioning of all your WP MA tags on Javanese items as being close to nuisance tagging - sorry to say - as the article from which I cite specifically is related to europe.

As for any attempt to draw in all four quarters of asia in any one article is IMHO intellectually arrogant anyways - they are all disparate, anthropologically, linguistically and historically - wikipedia has a very large fault in allowing the asia category and all its disparate elements being put together in one bag. SatuSuro 06:58, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Yet, the Project has specific teams working on the History of Western Asia and North Africa. It is only East Asia that seems currently overlooked. Dimadick (talk) 07:07, 15 August 2010 (UTC)|

That does not make Borobudur and Prambanan medieval monuments (which are not in East Asia but very specifically South East Asia- maritime at that) - sorry - they are not european - and I would stongly suggest you shore up a better justification for the tagging than that - as I see no reason to leave those tags there - in all WP:AGF - please either go and re-write the main medieval history article lead sentence and see what a response you get from other editors over that one - or please leaves Javanese monuments alone - thanks - or giver very very good reasons at to defend your case SatuSuro 07:13, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

there are already many dubious project tags being spammed on every article, editors should take care to ensure that when they do spam project tags they are only doing into articles that are clearly with the scope of the project in particuar I'll draw your attention to the definition of Middle ages project This is a WikiProject on the Middle Ages, for those Wikipedians interested in that middle age of European history that definition clearly excludes areas of the current day Indonesia and most other areas of asia except for some portions of the middle east where empires//crusades etc occurred. I suggest that you undo your erronous tagging rather than leaving it for others to clean up. Gnangarra 07:56, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I still don't see how it is "erroneous tagging" but my edits have already been reverted. Dimadick (talk) 08:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


I see that you re-added the WikiProject Europe banner to Talk:Germany, although the banner had previously been removed, and you do not refer to any discusssion on the matter.

Please note that Germany is not within the scope of WikiProject Europe, which explicitly restricts itself to those articles not covered by a more specific project:

"The Project does not take responsibility for areas of Europe already covered by a project. For example, where a European country is covered by a national project [my emphasis] or a regional project (e.g. WP:EEUROPE, WP:MICROSTATE, etc.). The project shall also not cover articles involving the European Union, Eurovision or European History."

Boson (talk) 18:57, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

In response to your reply on my talk page:
No, I had not noticed that someone had added the project banner to some other European countries that have their own projects. Possibly that was done by someone who is not a member of the project. I see that France was also added very recently. Like most project members, I imagine, I did not have non-project countries on my watchlist. I noticed Germany because I am also a member of WP:GER. The Europe project explicitly excludes such countries from the project. It was set up explicitly to cover those countries that did not have their own project and those pan-European topics that were not covered by the European Union project. I think it would be best if consensus were reached on the project talk page before changes are made to the scope of the project. --Boson (talk) 19:40, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Pages to merge[edit]


It may not be efficient for pages to be created with single ssentences. They are not really worthy of even a stub classification. I came across some of your pages on Sumerian religion and would suggest you merge them. If not then I will begin to stick merge tags on and even do some of it myself if the articles are not expanded soon.

Many of those little stubs can be quite easily included on the main pages of the religion and do not warrant a page of their own. A simple list would have been better.

Chaosdruid (talk) 01:25, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Heraclius the Elder[edit]

Congrats on expanding this really important article! Very comprehensive and in-depth work. I do think however that the section on the Armenian revolt should be condensed and sourced, if possible, from somewhere else. The verbatim block of text, with its toherwise unmentioned Armenian names and the peculiar style, really stands out to the eye and is rather incomprehensible as it lacks any context. Do you know some other, secondary source that discusses Heraclius' actions there in detail? Constantine 00:16, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

If I did, I would use them. Unfortunately the Armenian events are mostly overlooked. Dimadick (talk) 05:08, 30 August 2010 (UTC)


Wilhelmina Will (talk) 20:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Double barnstar[edit]

I find it really odd that you have not been awarded one yet for your fantastic and tireless work here, so there it goes:

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For continuous high-quality contributions to historical biographical articles from the Roman and Byzantine eras. Constantine 02:50, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Categorisation barnstar1b.png The Categorisation Barnstar
For creating, and adding articles to, a host of new categories, making searching by subject that much easier. Constantine 02:50, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

With best regards, :) Constantine 02:50, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I have nominated the two brothers for DYK. Cheers, Constantine 07:48, 5 September 2010 (UTC)


Why are you putting cryptid templates in (talk) pages about mythological animals? As far as I know, "cryptid" is not synonymous with "mythological animal"--Mr Fink (talk) 14:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Then it would be a good question why the project covers article such as genie and werewolf. Dimadick (talk) 14:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about genie, but, people do claim to see werewolves, like the situation of the "Beast of Bray Road"--Mr Fink (talk) 16:23, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Why do movies belong in Wikiproject American Old West?[edit]

I noticed that you'd like The Gambler (TV movie series) (among other movies) to be part of WikiProject American Old West. I do not think it fails under the scope of that project. This is a fictional portrayal of the Old West and it has nothing to do with the real American Old West. Nothing in the Wikiproject's description suggests fictional accounts of the Old West fail under the scope of that project. The wording there indicates otherwise, in fact. I see that many movies have been tagged as part of this project. If indeed, fictional accounts of the Old West fall under the scope of that project, it ought to be explicitly stated on the project page. This would first require discussion. I'm strongly of the opinion that it makes no logical sense to include movies under that project. Having a Wikiproject American Western Films or some sub-project of Wikiproject Films would be much more sensible. Jason Quinn (talk) 15:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I have started a discussion on the project talk page. Please do not add any more films to this wikiproject until some resolution is made. Jason Quinn (talk) 16:00, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Category:Unassessed American Old West articles is backlogged[edit]

From Wikipedia talk:WikiProject American Old West:

"...There are over six hundred (articles) in the backlog..."

I've noticed that you've been doing a lot of project tagging lately, without leaving an assessment. I must now ask that you assess all American Old West articles that you tagged, with the exception of the Western books, Western movies, and Western TV shows. We're still discussing whether to include those or not. If you need help, just let me know and I'd be happy to help you. UtahraptorMy mistakes; I mean, er, contributions 13:51, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Stephen Lekapenos[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 06:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Constantine Lekapenos[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 06:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

"Category:Conflicts in 2000" (and the annoying "Conflict in" spamming just everywhere)[edit]

How was this a "conflict"? Some kind of conflict in which only one side is armed, and the second one is not putting any kind of resistance? The REAL conflict here was the Second Chechen War anyway, everything there was just part of this conflict. And stop posting category "Conflict" EVERYWHERE. And even a a battle or whatever is NOT an armed conflict. "ARMED CONFLICT" IS JUST ANOTHER NAME FOR "WAR". That's all. -- (talk) 15:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

American Old West movies, books, and comics[edit]

Could you please stop tagging the movies, books, and comics made after 1900 with the {{WikiProject American Old West}} tag? See this discussion for more details. The UtahraptorTalk to me/Contributions 12:38, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Latest edit for Theodora (11th century)[edit]

Hi Dimadick,

Apologies for the Theodora (11th century) edit, that was my mistake, I thought I had removed the Alexios I succession table from my workspace, but I must have overlooked it. Thanks for picking it up! Oatley2112 (talk) 07:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

(Princess) Henrietta (Anne) of England[edit]

I would appreciate your opinion about the proper name of (Princess) Henrietta (Anne) of England, see Talk:Princess Henrietta of England JdH (talk) 13:40, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject East Asia[edit]

Hello, and thank you for tagging almost 200 articles for WikiProject East Asia. While many of these tags are good, I have removed several of them. Please do not be upset, your contribution has been exceedingly valuable, and I don't want to step on your toes. The reason I removed some of the tags is because the project has self identified as a mid level scope project, which means that its aim is to cover regional issues, events, entities, etc. and historical entites. As a general guideline, for contemporary issues, events, entities etc. if more than one country within East Asia is involved, it is within our scope. If only one country is involved, or multiple countries are involved and only one of them is within East Asia, it is not. By this logic, 1950s in Hong Kong does not fall within our scope, while Transfer of sovereignty over Hong Kong does.

For more information, or if you would like to voice a concern over our scope, please feel free to visit the project page. While you're there, consider signing up as well. We could use you!

WikiProject North America
East Asia (orthographic projection).svg Another editor has noticed your contributions to articles related to East Asia, and would like to invite you to join WikiProject East Asia, a collaborative effort to improve coverage of East Asia on Wikipedia.

Sincerely, Sven Manguard Talk 22:07, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Please read our scope document[edit]

Please, I implore you, read our scope document. It's on the project page, and specifics are on the talk page (WP:WikiProject East Asia.) Most of the things you have tagged since my last message are not within the project scope. WWII battles not between two East Asia countries are not covered. India, Guam, and the Philippines are not covered. US-Japan relations are not covered. This project does not cover everything in East Asia, it's scope is much more specific. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but please try to understand where this is coming from. If you want to comment on our scope, please do, but please abide by the scope in your tagging until consensus is reached.

Thank you,
Sven Manguard Talk 19:39, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Umm Wha?[edit]

Hi there. A you have a new message alert popped up and I saw the linked difference. I'm not sure what exactly happened there. If you wanted to leave a message, please feel free to do so.

As for the above, I wanted to first apologize if my messages above seemed harsh. I realize that you were offering help, and should have been nicer. Second of all, I wanted to thank you for those 300 or so tags. A lot of them were exceedingly useful and boosted the project a great deal. It seems that you have a knack for finding pages.

So, well, we didn't get off to the best of starts, but I am sorry if you feel mistreated. Feel free to contact me, and feel free to join the project. Cheers, Sven Manguard Talk 05:46, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

More overzealous/inappropriate tagging[edit]

As other editors have already asked, please could you take the time to read the comments posted on the WP:EASIA Talk page. Indiscriminately slapping project tags on the talk page of every single article related to East Asian countries is not especially constructive, as, as far as I can see, articles on cities or regions in Japan or other East Asian countries do not appear to be within the scope of WikiProject East Asia. Thank you. --DAJF (talk) 11:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Added links for Rust and Hippler[edit]

Thanks for adding the links for these individuals! I'm a new user and hadn't gotten around to figuring that out just yet, so it'll be a good model for me! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ...the point is to change it (talkcontribs) 03:11, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure. Dimadick (talk) 07:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit summary reminder[edit]

Information icon.svg

Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
Edit summary text box

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field – please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you.Valfontis (talk) 20:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Help on Dacian categories[edit]

Thanks for the help! Here is an invitation to the project too. Best regards!

Roman bust of a Dacian tarabostes, Hermitage, St Petersburg, Russia - 20070614.jpg
Hi! From your edits, it looks like you might be interested in ancient Dacia. Would you like to join the WikiProject Dacia? It is a project aimed to better organize and improve the quality and accuracy of the articles related to these topics. We need help expanding and reviewing many articles, and we also need more images. Your input is welcomed! Thanks and best regards!

--Codrin.B (talk) 20:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi again! I see you are already pretty involved with articles relating to the project and adding project banners. If you wish you join, you can add your name in the list of members. Regards! --Codrin.B (talk) 21:14, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

With the ever expanding Wikipedia, I feel the basic need for any Wikiproject is locating articles of interest. Which is why I am typically adding project banners. I am afraid I am not knowledgeable enough in Dacian matters, lacking sources. I am just glad that a Wikiproject pays attention to an area of Europe that is often overlooked. Dimadick (talk) 07:36, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

People on the project came with different interests and backgrounds. We have some interested only in project structure and not in the articles. I myself focus more on the project infrastructure, categorization, assessment than the articles themselves, at least at this point. We need more than article content help so your involvement so far is more than necessary to make you a member. Thanks for the kind words and help.--Codrin.B (talk) 15:25, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

'Dacian' archaeological cultures[edit]

Just thought I'd leave a note to explain why I reverted a series of your recent edits. You added {{WikiProject Dacia}} to a few article talk pages: Talk:Linear Pottery culture, Talk:Boian culture, Talk:Gumelniţa-Karanovo culture, Talk:Usatovo culture, Talk:Cernavodă culture. But in each case the archaeological culture that is the subject of the article dates to several millennia before the Dacians existed - therefore they really had no connection to the Dacians and aren't in the scope of that WikiProject. I also removed WP Dacia from Talk:Stari Ras, since that's a Medieval city that again has no connection to the Iron Age and classical era tribe known as the Dacians. —Joseph RoeTkCb, 09:44, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi guys! Just wanted to pitch in from WikiProject Dacia. We clarified the scope of the project here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dacia/Goals. Indeed those cultures do not fit the time span described in the scope, even though they fit the space. But I just wanted to clarify that not only Dacians as a people are in the scope of this project, as described at the link provided. Projects like History, European History, Archaeology, Romania would be more appropriate. Not sure if there are projects about Prehistory and cultures. I hope this helps and I welcome your comments. --Codrin.B (talk) 21:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Dimadick. You have new messages at Codrinb's talk page.
Message added 15:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Notes Codrin.B (talk) 15:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

History of Cluj-Napoca[edit]

One observation: I don't know if you should set the assessment and the importance of an article to be the same for all projects. The importance of an article definitely varies for each project, while the quality assessment varies (usually not that much though). Each project has their own process of assessment and designation of importance and members of each project will assess the articles individually and separate from other projects. As in our example, I would think History of Cluj-Napoca should be of high importance to Romania, mid to Dacia, low-to-mid to European history, low to History. But I would let members from those projects determine that. Let me know your thoughts.--Codrin.B (talk) 14:08, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Ideally this would be so. But many articles are left unasessed for years, so a single assessment is better than nothing. Take for example Wikiproject Romania. 1626 unasessed articles, most of them left like that for over a month. Dimadick (talk) 14:16, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I know, there is a lot a of work needed to assess everything. Maybe is better to assess quality for all and let them put the importance? Or just assign the most sensible or logical importance. But I think you should consider joining some of these projects, even if you help only with assessment and categorization. You are doing the tasks that members usually (should) do after all. Cheers! --Codrin.B (talk) 17:26, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

La Tène culture[edit]

Take a look at La Tène culture. I've been trying to add a few relevant projects there and there is a guy who insists on stopping me. See the conversation on the talk page. I can see some of his points but I think is better to have more relevant project than less, since it stirs collaboration. I know you are very judicious about categorizing and adding WikiProjects. What do you think? Thanks and regards! --Codrin.B (talk) 18:52, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for not responding earlier, but I was preoccupied with the creation of another article and a template. I had attempted to add a further Wikiproject to the La Tène culture in August 2010, at least from what I can see in the talk page's history. It is the Wikiproject of the United Kingdom since the article specifically mentions: "La Tène cultural material appeared over a large area, including parts of Ireland and Great Britain (the lake dwellings at Glastonbury, England, are an example of La Tène culture". May addition was removed by Johnbod, citing "Let's just have wp Switzerland; this could be under 15 or so country projects otherwise". Which doesn't really sound much of a reason to me. The wide scope of this article should ideally help list archaeological sites in each of these countries. But I would like to avoid edit warring about it. Dimadick (talk) 16:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ablabius (assassin)[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:02, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Crime categories[edit]

Hello. You seem to be putting people into crime categories. People may be criminals, but they are not crimes. For example, the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. is a 1968 crime. James Earl Ray, the man who killed King, is not a 1968 crime. Please consider this before you add people to crime categories. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 07:20, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Please stop. I don't want to make a big deal of this, but people do not belong in crime categories. People may be criminals but they are not crimes. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 17:41, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


Hi. I'm Monstrelet (talk · contribs)'s missus - he asked me to have a look at the page. Could I ask that next time you are tempted to turn a redirect into an article about something that's not related to where it's redirecting, you ask an admin to clear the decks first. Takes two minutes, saves considerable fannying about later :). I've got to sort it, you'll see some weird edits for the next few minutes. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 14:15, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

You are aware that the redirect was only used in a single article, right? Dimadick (talk) 14:17, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Quite aware. I'm also aware that the history of the article prior to redirect was stuck at the bottom of your article, and needed to be elsewhere, and the talkpage contained references to the original article and the reason for redirecting it. The correct thing to have done was to have moved Angilas to Angilas (Film monster) (or some similar name), to free up Angilas for your article. That preserves the history and the talkpage content, and would have saved me 20 minutes of fannying about to fix it (see WP:HISTSPLIT). Still, it's fixed now, so no worries. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 14:46, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Siege of Phasis[edit]

Hello Dimadick! A most impressive article, especially for a first-time effort. Well done! Only one observation on citing. Please cite each individual fact/sentence/paragraph with the page where you found it, not the entire page range that concerns the whole article. It is both more professional and helps anyone who wants to check up facts. BTW, have you nominated it for DYK? There's lots of absurd misunderstandings there that might pique the interest. And thanks for the heads up on WPDacia, I didn't know the Goths had been included in its scope. Cheers, Constantine 19:13, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

No, I have not nomitated ir for DYK. I was under the impression it rarely deals with Medieval articles. About the citation, it might look more professional. But I try to avoid representing five pages from the same source as five different sources in the reference pages. Dimadick (talk) 08:56, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Anastasius (Samaria)[edit]

Hello! I tried to qualify Anastasius' role with what was most appropriate in relation to his involvement in religious matters, but you may be right that neither Byzantine clergy nor Byzantine theologian apply, at least as far as we know. The best way to describe him is probably just as holder of a political office, and Magistri officiorum is good enough for that. I'll remove this category. Place Clichy (talk) 11:06, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Anatolius (Osroene)[edit]

Orlady (talk) 18:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm puzzled[edit]

I noticed that you added a tag to the article Yohannes III of Ethiopia connecting it to WikiProject Women's History. I'm puzzled at your action: how is he relevant to Women's History? I could see how his wife, the Empress Menen Liben Amede, would be -- I've been unable to find enough information to write more than a perfunctory stub about her, which I don't want to do -- but IFAICS Yohannes as the person himself provides no insight to the subject. Unless weak figureheads notable mostly for their religious devotion can be said to be relevant to Women's History. -- llywrch (talk) 00:03, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

That "minor edit" check box[edit]

You might consider using it when adding a template to hundreds of talk pages. I don't appreciate having my watchlist fill up with dozens of (+51) edits by you that I can't filter out. john k (talk) 01:49, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Siege of Phasis[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Anatolius (curator)[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 18:04, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for 557 Constantinople earthquake[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 18:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Definitely--I wonder how THAT was omitted[edit]

I see that you added a needed category for Josephine Baker shortly after my editing-unrelated proposal (thereby perhaps making it editing related). That's of pretty high importance to me, so you also help reinforce that fact for me. Thanks.Julzes (talk) 11:32, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Internet in Turkey - Turkish page?[edit]


I saw you created "Internet in Turkey" If there is a Turkish page for "Internet in Turkey" could you link from the English page?


Jzlcdh (talk) 15:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I did not create the article, only its talkpage. I am not sure if there is a counterpart in other Wikipedias. Dimadick (talk) 15:14, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Elizabeth College, Guernsey[edit]

Hi, I was wondering why you added Elizabeth College, Guernsey to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women's_History. Elizabeth College is a (mainly) all boys school. Having been there, I'm not really clear that it would have any relevance to Women's History! Mrh30 (talk) 14:41, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

The monarch would be listed as 'founder' of lots of institutions around the time. There's a question of notability - it is a notable fact for the school that Elizabeth I was listed as the founder (or more precisely, it was founded on her orders). The fact that she founded Elizabeth College wouldn't be classed as notable for Elizabeth. Mrh30 (talk) 15:05, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wife of Julius Nepos[edit]

A tag has been placed on Wife of Julius Nepos, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

there is just nothing here to write about

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:11, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Tagging again[edit]

I see you have been very active tagging for the Women's history project however I wonder if most of the articles tagged are just about a women. I wonder how you are discerning what counts was "women's history". Anne Michaels, Jackie Collins, Enid Blyton and ‎Anne Stevenson ‎are women writers but I don't really see how they clearly fit under this project more than most articles about women. Are you involved with any consultation with others on the project concerning the choice of articles? Please advise. Thank you. Span (talk) 12:00, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Women who have either made significant contributions in politics, arts. and literature or gotten significant coverage for other reasons. Dimadick (talk) 12:14, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Is that not every article on Wikipedia with a woman as its subject? There would not be an article unless she was notable. It does seem that every woman is being tagged. I suggest this would undermine the category and the project. Span (talk) 14:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Not really. Up till now, the project is merely locating articles of interest and has yet to substantially improve particular articles. Dimadick (talk) 06:34, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
I came here to discuss this very thing with you. I don't see how women such as Julie Brown, Lisa Kudrow, or Kelly Gallagher (alpine skier) have a direct relation with women's history. They are women and notable but they aren't notable for having influenced the history of women as a whole. Dismas|(talk) 09:16, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

At this point I am looking for negative stereotypes of women in the media. Brown and Kudrow are both listed in association with such roles. Kelly Galagher seems to be important for Northern Ireland.

There are no women who have influenced the history of women as a whole. There are no men who have such influence either. At most they have influenced the course of history on their country or region. Not on a planetary scale. It would be setting the bar for inclusion too high. Dimadick (talk) 09:24, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I've asked for commentary by more members of this particular wikiproject here. Dismas|(talk) 09:32, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
There is current discussion pertaining to this at the Women's History project page here. Would you mind not templating BLPs until a consensus has been reached? Cynwolfe (talk) 15:23, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── You've been asked politely now to join the discussion at the WikiProject and stop tagging BLPs. Please do so. Otherwise, I will take your disruptive behavior to WP:AN/I. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:55, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

From what I see on the Project's discussion page, the conversation is about inclusion of males and works about males. Which is what I have responded to. Dimadick (talk) 05:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Please see WT:WikiProject Women's History#Where's the bar for inclusion in this project?, especially the recently added subsection, Discussion to reach consensus. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 06:02, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Please respect the wishes of other Women's History project members, as well as other editors participating in the discussion linked above, and stop placing the Women's History banner until we resolve issues of scope. Every editor who's expressed an opinion wants you to stop. If you find articles that you're sure other project members would find appropriate, please take time to assess the article when placing the banner, and place all the articles you banner on your own watchlist. Otherwise, you're only creating work for other project members that we don't want. We need to establish the credibility of the project. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:43, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Dimadick. You have new messages at Nedim Ardoğa's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Women's history project[edit]

Hi Dimadick, several editors have expressed concern that you're adding this tag to so many (arguably unrelated) articles that it's effectively becoming meaningless. Could I ask you please to stop adding that tag completely for now, and join the discussion here instead? Many thanks, SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 14:50, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

H again, I meant please stop adding the tag or adding any assessments, until the other editors on the project agree with what you're doing. Jessica Simpson, for example, could not reasonably be described as of mid-importance to women's history. Please don't add the tag or assess any other articles until the issues are resolved. Many thanks, SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 17:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Wait a minute. You count consensus and expect me to remain silent? I am still discussing notability with other editors. Dimadick (talk) 17:26, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

There's consensus that you were adding the tag inappropriately. It's difficult, for example, to see the relevance of Olivia Newton-John to women's history (no disrespect intended), so it appeared that you were adding the tag to all pages about women. As a result, people asked you to stop adding either the tag or the assessments. There's now a workshop set up to decide the scope of the project, so perhaps you could take part in that and abide by whatever decision is made there. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 18:36, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

The discussion is still ongoing. Particularly since fiction related-articles were added by another user. Dimadick (talk) 05:50, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of War over Water for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article War over Water 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 its deletion discussion page 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 good 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. Thank you.Greyshark09 (talk) 21:25, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


I would like to bring to your attention that in discussions on talk pages your tone often comes across as argumentative or defensive. While I know it was posted over a week ago, your response on the Women's History Scope page regarding the miscellaneous topics, was addressed directly to me, rather than contributing to the overal question posed. Quite frankly there was no need given the format of the page for you to offer an insult. Furthermore the accusation made was clearly out of line as I had directly linked the article in question, not copied it from someone else's comments. I wholeheartedly stand by my position that the article in question has nothing to do with women's history, although its role in fashion is clearly pertinent. The remainder of your comment was to call into question other editors (who I have not checked history to determine) who had tagged articles you did not agree with. In all you did not answer the question, only offered insult to myself and other editors. I post this in hope that you become aware that these behaviors are viewed less than favorably by other editors, and that you take a moment to step back and realize the majority of editors are not talking directly to you, but rather in a general sense. Our overall goal is to improve the encyclopedia. Your opinions and contributions are valued, and it would be appreciated if you would show other editors the courtesy and consideration they show you. Thank you. --Tbennert (talk) 04:27, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject templates[edit]

Hi Dimadick, WP:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America is a daughter project of WP:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas. There's no need to place WP:IPA templates on every article that already has a WP:IPNA template. WP:IPNA is fairly active, so indigenous subjects in Canada and the United States get comparatively much more attention than articles pertaining to indigenous peoples of the Americas outside of these two countries, which could benefit from tagging and updating categories. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:40, 17 July 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi

For the most part WP:INPA and WP:IPA articles don't have WP:WikiProject Ethnic groups templates. I was thinking of bringing the subject up at WP:IPA discussion and will do so. Cheers, -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:59, 17 July 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi

BTW, do you have any interest in assessing articles? WP:IPNA has almost 2K unassessed articles here: Category:Unassessed Indigenous peoples of North America articles. Cheers, -Uyvsdi (talk) 18:16, 17 July 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Dimadick. You have new messages at Talk:Orhan I.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

New Page Patrol survey[edit]


New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Dimadick! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Dominique Papety[edit]

Hi! I see you added the women's history template to the talk page of Dominique Papety. I've left it, since I know nothing about him, but wondered if you added it by mistake. Dsp13 (talk) 21:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Stephen & Constantine Lekapenos[edit]

Hello Dimadick! I've nominated Stephen Lekapenos and Constantine Lekapenos for GA, but there is the question whether the two articles should be merged, since most of the text is common to both and since the two brothers acted in tandem. As the original creator, what do you think? Cheers, Constantine 08:12, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

They were individuals and co-emperors. I don't see people like Gordian I and Gordian II merged even when much of the the text in their article is in common. Why should Stephen and Constantine be singled out? Dimadick (talk) 06:45, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, Gordian I and Gordian II have considerably different texts, as their careers are different. Stephen and Constantine are virtually a pair, and their lives are known almost only from from their elevation as co-emperors to their downfall and exile, and during this period their careers are identical. Merging them is not "singling them out", there are plenty of articles on brother-sister pairs (cf. Sibling groups) in Wikipedia. Constantine 11:57, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Women's History Project Again[edit]

Hi Dimadick, I see that today you spent a lot of time tagging pages under the Women's History project. I'm wondering (again) if this is with the full of consenus of the team over there as last time editors spent a great deal of time untagging articles that hadn't been discussed. I'm not sure, for example why a List of Milanese consorts would come under the project and the character Nancy Drew is certainly a puzzle. Best wishes Span (talk) 20:29, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

The Project agreed to not include articles concerning women active following the year 1950. Medieval articles and lists are included. Literary works with impact are still included. Dimadick (talk) 07:36, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Tagging of John Carver (Mayflower Pilgrim)[edit]

You cannot rate this article low in importance. John Carver was the first governor of Plymouth Colony. He is was the first name on the Mayflower Compact. He came over on the Mayflower. He was highly respected and gave much of his fortune to bring his friends to the New World. As another important Plymouth governor William Bradford said of Carver, he worked himself to death that spring and his and the other lives cannot be valued at any price.[1][2]

He is important in MANY respects to American History, if you know anything about American History or read any of the references.

Whatever your personal opinion is of the article in any other respect, Carver is definitely NOT low in historical importance. If I am misreading this rating scale, please let me know.Mugginsx (talk) 10:39, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

He was already rated of low importance by Wikiproject United States and Wikiproject Massachusetts. I added the same rating to Wikiproject Calvinism because I don't see any mention of him being a particularly significant religious figure. Dimadick (talk) 11:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I see, well that scale is hard to read. Thanks for the explanation. Mugginsx (talk) 11:52, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Tiberius II Constantine's dates[edit]

Hi Dimadick. Yikes! Apologies for that, and thanks for picking that up. Going back through my draft, I can see how it happened... Is there such a thing as "Old Age Dyslexia"? ;) I re-read it at least five times and didn't even see the dates! Thanks again. Oatley2112 (talk) 09:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Project assessments[edit]

You're current - and valuable - project assessments are not putting any explanation in the edit summary. Maile66 (talk) 21:00, 10 May 2012 (UTC

Co-operative Block Building[edit]

Hey there. I noticed you recently rated Co-operative Block Building as stub-class for two projects. How come it's stub-class and not start-class? It's not a very long article, but it covers its subject fairly well, has a number of reliable sources, and follows most general start-class guidelines. Chevsapher (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

You can re-evaluate them yourself. But the sources are not really third-party or peer-reviewed. Dimadick (talk) 15:20, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the re-evaluation. Unfortunately, it's next to impossible to find ANY non-Crawford sources for the article, short of the NRHP nomination form. It's just one of many old business buildings in small towns throughout the Midwest, and sources are far and few between. There are VERY few people who even know the structure's proper name.

I'm seeing more of your evaluating on my watchlist. Keep up the good work! Chevsapher (talk) 18:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Dimadick (talk) 18:35, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: Wikis[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Dimadick. You have new messages at Mathonius's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Duncan II of Scotland[edit]

You did a good job in expanding and citing the article Duncan II of Scotland, I have been through the citations that you added and there are a couple of small matters that were not clear to me. Please see Talk:Duncan II of Scotland#Comment on citations -- PBS (talk) 11:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

An alteration to the template:MLCC[edit]

Please see the article Sir Charles Seely, 2nd Baronet. That includes two sources which are unreliable. The first if Rayment -- who does not cite its sources. The second is Lundy. Lundy by himself is not a reliable source. But he cites reliable sources so by including the source which he cites (WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT), the citation becomes reliable and in the longer run those sources can be checked and the Lundy part of the citation removed. If you look at Lundy's faq he warns that some entries are from another data-base which have no sources and he has not checked them, he also says in point 6 "Where two sources disagree as to dates or places, I have shown both items as different events." which means that he is not hiding anything and his methodologies are similar to the best practices on Wikipedia. Also by including his citations in a Wikiepdia citation, if his website goes (as many such sites do) then the information can still be checked against the source which he cited.

To date I have looked at several score articles that include a Cawley citations and not one cites his sources as recommended in WP:CITE. Also because he does not always use fixed links to the tags inside the articles (some of them seem to change when he updates the page), many of the citations to his pages suffer from link rot, this is not helped when the name given in the "title=" field of the citation is not the same as he used in his text (It makes finding the information on the page time consuming and difficult).

I have however considered what you wrote and I have altered the template {{MLCC}} so that it takes a warning flag instead of defaulting to warnings. I have also edited the article Andronikos Komnenos (son of John II Komnenos) to include the main citations that Cawley cites in his text -- so there is no need for the warning flag. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts of this. -- PBS (talk) 13:54, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Lets see an example here of what citing every source Cawley actually uses in a profile to the corresponding article. In the profile of Malcolm III, just to firmly establish his paternity, Cawley cites:
I usually try to have the citation link directly to the external link. Incorporating all references to primary sources in the text of the article. Such as "this relationship is reported by Marianus Scotus, Florence of Worcester, etc. Lets say we incorparate all this in a reference called "Cawley1". The next reference in the same profile uses another source, a secondary reference to "The Kingship of the Scots" by Duncan, to analyze the nickname Canmore. And the cited possibility that it was actually the nickname of Malcolm IV. Lets say we incorporate this as "Cawley 2" and again point to Duncan.
After a relatively brief mention of Malcolm's career, not his primary area of interest, Cawley focuses on his death in battle. Citing two primary sources: Florence of Worcester and William of Malmesbury. Lets say we incorporate them as "Cawley 3".
Cawley next offers citations for the original marriage of Malcolm III, citing the Orkneyinga Saga. Then focusing on its lack of confirmation by other contemporary sources, as well as several possible interpretations on the subject. Which aren't really unique, but he summarizes the arguments themselves, not authors. We can site the information as Cawley 4.
He next offers a sub-profile on Margaret, second wife of Malcolm. Which incorporates four primary sources and a secondary one. Lets say "Cawley 5".
I get the notion that the process fills the article with somewhat redundant citations, instead of actually increasing reliability. --Dimadick (talk) 15:52, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia has a policy on what is and is not reliable sources (WP:SOURCES). Ideally what is needed is to replace Cawley with a reliable secondary source. In which case if the information is summed up by that source then there is no need to include primary sources, but as Cawley is not a reliable source, but the sources he cites are, then WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT is pertinent. Looking at quite a few of the articles for which Cawley is cited as the major source, the notability of the article is open to question. For example although Andronikos Komnenos (son of John II Komnenos) warrants a sentence in the John II Komnenos article, but what is notable enough in his biography to warrant an article about Andronikos Komnenos (WP:NOTDIRECTORY)? It may be in the future that some something changes and genealogical information otherwise of no historical note becomes notable (eg Barack Obama's mother 'probably the descendant of a black slave' (30 Jul 2012)) but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and until it does, then there is no need to record it -- although if someone has gone to the bother of creating such an article I personally would not AdD it.
Using the example (Malcolm III of Scotland) that you give:
  • "After a relatively brief mention of Malcolm's career, not his primary area of interest, Cawley focuses on his death in battle" there's the rub, Wikipedia's primary interest is in his notability ie his career. There are reliable sources that note his death so there is no need to use Cawley. If there were not then WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT would apply, and where he cites a reliable secondary source, hopefully an editor will in the future go and check it and then Cawley can be removed -- In this article A.A.M Duncan (2002) is cited directly, so Cawley does not need to be cited for his Duncan information.
  • "Which aren't really unique, but he summarizes the arguments themselves, not authors. We can site the information as Cawley 4." No because it is original research/opinion by a non expert/reliable source.
We can debate this between ourselves, but I think that if you wish to continue then it will be more constructive to do so at WP:RSN as others may have additional insights and opinions that we can consider. -- PBS (talk) 11:07, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Ballade des Dames du Temps Jadis[edit]


I just wanted to say, great edits on Ballade des Dames du Temps Jadis! I must admit I didn't even know about Aelis. I guess that shows once again the power of Wikipedia and collaborative editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas Arelatensis (talkcontribs) 22:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Class of Geography of the Falkland Islands.[edit]

Hi Dimadick,

Thank you for looking at the article Geography of the Falkland Islands. I am s littel surprised that you classed is as a "Start" level article. I am aware that other editors classed it as a "start"-level artcile, but when that classification was done (July 2012) the artcile had 15 references and occupied 10 kbytes. Since then it has increased to 35 kbytes and has 45 references.

The criteria for start and C class articles are are follows:

  • Start: An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources.
  • C-Class: The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup.

With reference to the above, I would be obliged if you woudl let me know which of the criteria you applied in doing your classification? Martinvl (talk) 16:43, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the help in standardizing the US presidential election articles[edit]

Hello, I noticed you edited the intro of all US presidential election articles before 1900 to match the ones from 1900 onward ("was the XXth quadrennial election, held Tuesday, November X, XXXX" etc.). Thank you for the help! This past week I have been editing the articles to standardize them to the elections from 2000 onward (which needed some cleaning and tweaking themselves) and doing some general cleanup in the intros. The articles were all over the place and shouldn't start with some detail in the first sentence. I not only standardized the intro two sentences, but rearranged any paragraph or statements and standardized links as well to match whatever flows the best and is proper (as in, the candidates should be mentioned before any global events going on during the election). I managed to get down to 1900 a few days ago, and was going to start finishing the rest today, but then I saw that all the articles already had the intro in place. I still need to do some of the minor cleaning up for each one but at least you already have done the main edit needed in the meantime. Cheers :) (talk) 11:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

No problem there. I thought you were doing a good job and thought to help finish it. Keep up the good work. --Dimadick (talk) 11:28, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Imperial Russian categories[edit]

A user involved in the discussion on the Imperial Russian categories has been emptying people out of them out of process, which has the potential to disrupt the whole discussion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:55, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of the Roman Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Augustan Age (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) 12:17, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

FYI on discussion about Template:United States topics[edit]

Hi! Your recent edits to Template:United States topics have led to concern about template size. You may wish to comment at Template talk:United States topics. --Orlady (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Use of the template US history & US topics[edit]

Hello. I appreciate you added it in good faith, but I have to disagree with you adding {{US history}} to all sorts of articles. This template is just too broad to be directly relevant to most of these articles. For example, do we really need this template at the end of Korean War, or the US Topics template? Is Korean War -> Nat Turner's Slave Rebellion a sensible link? I think not. The most important template, by far, is "Korean War," with "Cold War" also reasonable. If any history template is appropriate, it'd be a "History of Korea" template, and even that is a bad idea since the link between the Korean War and say ancient wars with Japan 900 years earlier is shaky at best. This is especially seen if someone considered adding a "History of China" or "History of Russia" or "United Nations" template to the article; all were relevant players in the Korean War, but none of them deserves a link. This is true for almost all the links you added - I would use these templates very carefully in overview articles on US History only, not just "any historical event involving the United States."

I suppose the point is - would you mind reverting your additions? Or me reverting them? I don't want to get into a revert war, so if you'd rather talk first or have a unified discussion somewhere else with others, that would also be fine. SnowFire (talk) 05:48, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Naturally, I would mind. My problem with the template as it stood is that it had too few articles and offered a poor overview of a wide topic. And I don't see why multinational events like the Korean War should only have the template of a single country. Dimadick (talk) 07:13, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Because of template bloat. Once two templates have been added to a page, the first template - often a specific template linked to extra-relevant topics - will be auto-collapsed to save space. Once 6 templates have been added, like at Korean War, most readers will probably not bother expanding ANY of them! It's just like bluelinks, one high quality link is better than linking every word in a sentence. And from what you say on the Korean War, by all rights you should also be adding {{History of China}}, {{United Nations}}, etc. as well, which is well on the path to making the pile of templates useless.
The point is that a single RELEVANT template works. For the 13th amendment, my test case which you reverted me on, the relevant parts of US History are already linked in the article - the Civil War, the Reconstruction Amendments, the 14th, etc. The rest of the US Constitution topics are sensible links. The ENTIRE SCOPE OF US HISTORY, including utterly random things separated by 100 years like second-wave feminism, are not appropriate. I strongly feel that this template should not be expanded nor added to every article vaguely related to US History. SnowFire (talk) 19:03, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Have you given thought to say, building an Index of United States history-related topics or Book:United States history or Portal:United States history instead of excessive template expansion? -- (talk) 21:46, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
There is already a Wikiproject about United States history, but not a particularly active one. Dimadick (talk) 22:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
I don't mean a wikiproject, I mean a page where all your links can exist (such as the index book or list articles) -- (talk) 07:38, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Free Territory of Trieste[edit]

This is all but "fiction"; many things have surfaced on this matter in the recent years

— the Osimo treaty is a bilateral treaty which can not overwrite the peace treaty (as shown by the UN note, see source on page) — the issues can be opened anytime at the UN security council, as declared by the UN themselves in 1983 (post-Osimo) — the Territory is only under ITA/SLO/CRO administration, and NOT sovereignty. There is, in fact, no treaty saying ANYTHING about sovereignty changes. And you should know the difference between adm. and sov... it's huge. — dozens of proceedings in the Italian-run court of Trieste are completely stuck as citizens started appealing to an Italian lack of jurisdiction. — many triestine citizens are actively demanding for the peace treaty to be fully applied, as the provisional cold-war conditions Trieste's still in are still causing problems

So, the Territory has never become a "former country", it is still a sovereign entity. Unapplied? In most parts (not all, though), but surely still existing, and an open topic at the UN security council. And no-one has been able to prove otherwise, at any level.

The fact that in Wikipedia there are LOTS of italian nationalists who would constantly neglect this, doesn't change the bare facts — I'd hope the English wikipedia could be clear on this matter, without falling into the "stronger faction" trap. Triestines have always been barely represented on Wiki, as there are very few "full" articles on this land — and there's a reason for that... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aarska (talkcontribs) 08:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

"Can be opened" but has not been opened. The United Nations have taken no act on the matter since the 1950s. Unapplied sovereignity and nothing indicating recognition of a sovereign entity in the area. And the reason that Trieste is under-represented in Wikipedia is probably the same for the poor condition of other Italian and Balkan articles. Insufficient decent sources and/or interested users. Dimadick (talk) 08:10, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

You say "nothing indicating recognition of a sovereign entity in the area", check this out (fully valid, obviously, and unchanged by any other treaties): Art. 21.2 — see for yourself! No other document has changed this sovereignty status; meaning that it is a sovereign territory with two (now three) administrators (see: memorandum of understanding of 1954). Unapplied, in many (but definitely not all!) parts, yet untouched, as confirmed by the UN themselves in 1983 (important to say, after the Osimo bilateral treaty!). There's also the XVI resolution of the UN security council, which can be only overwritten by another resolution. It never happened so far. To this, I shall add many details, such ask the status of our free port, formally recognized even by Italy the fact that Italy won't ask for payment for motorway in the FTT, the italian prefect also having the role of "government commissioner for Trieste", and so on.. Anyone who've studied this in depth (and - sad to say - is not part of the academic establishment) will agree: the FTT formally still exists, albeit administered by other nations. Aarska (talk) 12:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

p.s: just to give you an idea of how UNPRECISE everything about trieste is on wikipedia, even the flag and coat of arms are actually... wrong (i'd need some support on changing these with the right ones which I prepared a while ago for another project.. could you help with this? I've never uploaded/updated pictures on wiki) Aarska (talk) 08:22, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I am also unfamiliar with the process of uploading. Perhaps you should raise accuracy concerns in the Talk pages of interested projects. Recently a number of "symbols" of defunct states were removed and replaced when users raised similar concerns. Dimadick (talk) 08:28, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I've added comments to the relevant discussions/to the previous discussion page of 2007, yet no reply :( how I can spark a discussion/update of these images, I really don't know... Aarska (talk) 12:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


Bästa nyskrivna.svg 100000 Edits
Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that very few editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

If you like you can add this userbox to your collection.

Bästa nyskrivna.svg This user has been awarded with the 100000 Edits award.

```Buster Seven Talk 15:39, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Category pairs[edit]

Sorry, but these history of art ones are much too simplistic & misleading. Better not to have any, but rely on the parent cats. Johnbod (talk) 22:52, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

They follow the pattern suggested by Art of Europe. Dimadick (talk) 22:53, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually they didn't, but when you can see the whole table of contents that's a rather different thing anyway. Article sections have to go in somwe order - categories don't. Johnbod (talk) 02:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


Just a heads up - the mathematics project does not tag categories with {{maths rating}}, so please don't add it to additional categories. The template should only ever be in the Talk namespace. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:24, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Also noticed your tagging a lot of mathematical categories with {{WikiProject Systems}}. A lot of those seem to be outside scope of the project, which is only semi-active. The mathematics project does not need to tag categories as it has its own mechanisms to keeping track of articles so it might be best just to leave them untagged.--Salix (talk): 14:49, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Frankly, I think the mathematical project does a poor job of keeping track of articles, since several relevant articles are untagged and haven't had many edits in years. The Systems Project has a wider scope because, by its nature, it covers Dynamical systems theory and areas involving multiple scientific disciplines. "Untagged" is equivalent to "invisible" for several categories which could use more attention. Dimadick (talk) 16:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
We have maybe an unconventional approach to article tagging, only really doing it if there is a need for tagging such as identifying which articles most need improvement. Just tagging articles which are in the project duplicates the work done by the bot which compiles Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/List of mathematics articles (0–9) etc, 25,000 articles in all. The system is good for identifying important changes at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Current activity. With this system we don't feel a great need to tag every single article and an untagged article is not seen as a problem.--Salix (talk): 18:01, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


Great job fixing {{USRepMA‎‎}}! —GoldRingChip 20:21, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I was trying to use it for easy navigation, when I discovered that several names were missing. Dimadick (talk) 20:23, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Category: Robot characters in video games[edit]

Thanks for commenting on the category name change proposal. I hope you understand that it just seems illogical to have a category called "Robot characters in video games" and then exclude robot characters who appeared in video games from being listed. I just changed the proposal to simply change it to "Category:Video game robots", which I think would solve the problem, since the emphasis would become "video game" characters who are "robots"...Mathewignash (talk) 11:58, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Pratt family[edit]

I noticed your comment on the CfD on Category:Pratt family. You have howerver ignored that we have an article Pratt family that is on a different family. We also have Category:Pratt-Romney family. The current category seems ambiguous under its present name.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:22, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013[edit]

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

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Roman Frederick Starzl 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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:40, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Roman Frederick Starzl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Factor (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) 12:13, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

June 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Women in Bosnia and Herzegovina 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:
  • radic In post-conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina, women are a driving force for change], IFAD</ref>), namely: the "transition from war to peace", economic transition and political transition. The

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:18, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Andy Mangels 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:
  • *''Excelsior: Forged in Fire'' (December, 2007. Featuring [[Hikaru Sulu]].

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


Hello. Please note that that 'Navigation templates' (such as the 'Poets Laureate of the United Kingdom' template) should be placed above the 'Authority control template' ([1]). Please consider modifying your latest edits. Thank you. --Omnipaedista (talk) 11:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Your user page[edit]

Hello, I found your user page while doing some wikiarchaeology. . I have restored all of its earliest surviving revisions from old copies of the Wikipedia database, so they are available to everyone now. Hope you don't mind. Graham87 11:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


I noted that you had tagged talk:Antimatter with a WikiProject Skepticism banner. I wondered why. I thought that Antimatter was supported by known Physics and therefore would not be subjected to the close scrutiny given (say) dowsing. Indeed, it is on the Wikiproject Physics list. Student7 (talk) 00:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

It happens to also be the subject of several fringe theories. Cloning is also very real, but the inaccurate claims about it are numerous. Dimadick (talk) 05:06, 29 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 when you edited Lady Charlotte Elliot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kinnaird (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) 10:39, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Nice to meet you[edit]

Hello Dimadick, My name is Jacob Mason J.Mason 11:29, 2 July 2013 (UTC) I am happy if we can be friends, If you want

I'm writing an academic article on people-participation in the 'production' of Shakespeare studies.

I noticed that you had recently provided some edits for the Wiki Shakespeare page, and wondered if I might ask you some questions about that?

This project is at a very early stage so I've not yet refined or worked out a fixed methodology. So the questions are also not yet fully formed. (And I am aware that you also contribute to many other pages.)

1. What motivates you specifically to contribute specifically to the Shakespeare page?

2. Do you consider that your skills in this regard are general, technical, or specialist?

3. Have you contributed to other Shakespeare-related pages?

3. What's you opinion on how the Shakespeare page has evolved over time?

4. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Shakespeare page in terms of its current form and content?

5. Who would you say are the target readers for this page?

6. What have been the advantages and/or the frustrations of working on the Shakespeare page?

7. What are your reflections on the process of wiki-engagement in terms of connection, community and collaboration?

8. In your view, are there any other questions that ought to be considered?

Many thanks for taking the time to read this!

TheoryofSexuality (talk) 17:33, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

My edits on the Shakespeare page were based on a simple reason. I was adding pages to categories involving 16th and 17th century dramatists and poets. I found him being among the most notable ommissions. Though I have made minor edits to other Shakespeare-related pages, I am far from an expert on the subject. Personally, I have enjoyed reading the historical plays of the author but I have not activelly added to the pages about them. Dimadick (talk) 17:45, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Your recent visit to the Hans Kelsen page[edit]

Greeting from the Hans Kelsen page

Thank you for your recent contribution to this page. As you may have noted the page has started its path to improvement from being a stub. Could you possibly glance at the page and indicate the TOP five (5) things which are needed on this wikipage to get the page its first promotion to a slightly higher page review status. This would help for me to try to set up a thirty day plan or a forty day plan to try to accomplish. Once again, thank you for your recent contribution to this page! (talk) 20:07, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

(1)Names of parents, and family background. Was his family upper class, middle class, working class, etc. (2) He was the main drafter of a constitution. What kind of ideas did the document reflect? (3) The controversy which cost Kelsen his position at the Constitutional Court should probably get an explanation. (4) Did the Nazi Party dismiss him from his college office due to his Jewish origin or because of his ideology? Were his previous publications banned? (5) He is mentioned to have worked on international law in the 1940s. Any notable examples? Dimadick (talk) 20:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

This is really a nice list. Some of these items will need more time and some a little less. Hopefully by the end of the month they'll get addressed. Do you think, if all five are done, this would be enough for the page re-eval? Once again, thank you for your recent contribution! (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Technically, any page can be re-evaluated at any time. A few more references could probably get the article ranked at C or B. Dimadick (talk) 06:32, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Yours comments were really well presented. It has taken about thirty or forty dedicated edits to get them put into the page, and now it seems all of your suggested edits are in there. Could you check if its there in the way you wanted to see it, or if another top 5 list would help the Kelsen page get its first upgrade! Again, with appreciation. (talk) 16:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Some good work there, though citing your work would be great. Just one problem with the use of "Czechoslovakia" in the background of his family. This was among the better known states created in the aftermath of World War I. In a 19th century context, would this be the Kingdom of Bohemia? Dimadick (talk) 16:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Much appreciation for the Gwelphs-and-Ghibellines edits. The harder research was about the Jewish identity questions versus the National Socialist Ideology passages which I could not tell if they met your standards on this tough issue. Also difficult was your Judge-nullification question of Kelsen which was not completely crystal clear because of its complexity. Again, with good regards for the challenge questions. (talk) 23:48, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:VG doesn't assess redirects.[edit]

Please don't tag the talk pages of redirects with a WPVG banner. It only creates error in the report since the project doesn't assess those. Thanks! :) ·Salvidrim!·  02:24, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • * [[Drusus Julius (D. f.) D. n. Caesar ([[Drusus Caesar]]), son of Germanicus, imprisoned and put to

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:20, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Claudia (gens), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Drusus Claudius Nero (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) 10:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


Hello Dimadick! Please check a discussion I opened on the addition of Category:Flavii to late imperial Roman figures unrelated to the actual gens Flavia. Cheers, Constantine 11:09, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Culture[edit]

This is inactive, & there is no point adding its banners anywhere. Johnbod (talk) 11:33, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Re:Inactive projects and banners - I have a very different point of view - regardless of a projects inactivity or activity, the placing of project banners on talk pages is a positive project maintenance action that in the long term aids the overall capacity to understand where projects exist to support and maintain articles related to the subject of the project - and also to show up those articles or collections of articles that are not supported by a related subject. just my 2cents worth. sats 07:40, 31 August 2013 (UTC)


Trumpetlarcomuseum.jpg I believe if you read the discussion page you will find a decision was made earlier in August to keep this image. Verne Equinox (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Your point being? I don't recall removing the image from any page. Dimadick (talk) 04:55, 28 August 2013 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Dimadick. You have new messages at Koavf's talk page.
Message added 02:51, 2 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Justin (koavf)TCM 02:51, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Revisionist Western 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:
  • figures, and this aspect of the spaghetti Western came to be one of its universal attributes (as seen in a wide variety of these films, beginning with one of the first popular spaghetti

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:31, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Burnt offering (Judaism)[edit]

Sorry I pinged you but maybe you didn't get it. Can you please look again at Talk:Burnt offering (Judaism), the proposal has (Judaism) in the title so is unlikely to be confused with non-Jewish burnt offerings. Best regards. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:40, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

You do realize that the practice has more to do with Jerusalem practices rather than the ancient Jewish diaspora, don't you? Dimadick (talk) 06:49, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Yes, my point exactly, the practice of burnt offering (Judaism) ended in 70CE. So why are you supporting an ancient Jewish diaspora Hebrew/Aramaic name korban olah from the Talmud for something that finished 400 years before the Talmud was written? Your argument here and there is in support of the move, but you've written Oppose. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:27, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited D. H. Th. Vollenhoven, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Parallelism (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) 11:50, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Orhan's spouse[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Dimadick. You have new messages at Talk:Orhan#İbrahim's mother.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 10:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Status of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland[edit]

Hi Dimadick. I think you are misunderstanding what the article called 'United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland' is. It is not a sovereign state. It refers to a period during the existence of the United Kingdom when it included all of Ireland. The United Kingdom has existed since 1801 to present, and there is only one article covering that sovereign state, all other articles cover the history of that sovereign state in specific periods. Regards, Rob (talk) 10:09, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

So your solution is linking historical articles to an article about a modern state with internet connection? The United Kingdom only exists since the 1920s. Dimadick (talk) 10:13, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Its about the state since 1801. You're wrong. You're linking to an historical period, and causing much confusion. The succession of 10% of the population of the UK is not that significant to state it on every article. Stop it. Rob (talk) 10:26, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Secession, not succession. And it fundamentally changed the ethnic composition. Dimadick (talk) 10:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
You need to start a discussion at United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Current consensus is that United Kingdom covers the state since 1801. Any further edits you make regarding this is vandalism. Stop or I will report you. Rob (talk) 10:30, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Report what? That you are delinking historical articles and presenting false information? Dimadick (talk) 10:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
You are linking sections for countries to a historical periods. There for countries. Its in the name...
Rob (talk) 10:33, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the Kingdom of Great Britain, the Kingdom of Scotland, etc. are all historic states. Not historic periods. The periods are the Georgian era, the Victorian era, and the Edwardian era. Dimadick (talk) 10:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
This is not as per consensus. Historical periods are any periods in history. History of the United Kingdom (1945–present) is another article covering a historical period. I'm not discussing this here, if you want to debate this, take it up at talk:United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, but consensus is strongly in support of the view that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland article covers a historical period of the United Kingdom. Please avoid making edits against consensus in future. Rob (talk) 10:41, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
What consensus? The only ones involved in the discussion of this consensus were you and DrKiernan. Dimadick (talk) 10:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
See Talk:United_Kingdom_of_Great_Britain_and_Ireland#Relationship_between_UKGBI_and_UKGBNI. Rob (talk) 10:48, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
You have got to be kidding me. A six-year old discussion of three users, including myself, where I argue that "Redefinitions of a state's title tend to reflect changes both in territory and government.", Bastin argues that that the article should follow the template of West Germany and remain speaking about the past, and Petecollier argues "The UKGBI is worthy of its own article beyond a doubt, and that article by its very nature needs to be historical.".

The article being historical, not the subject being a historical period. Dimadick (talk) 10:58, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not discussing this in a private space, if you want to start a discussion at talk:United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland then go ahead. You will need to provide sources for your claim, which you wont find, as this has already been analysed and discussed by editors over 6 years ago. Don't make any more disruptive edits. Rob (talk) 11:04, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Neutral notice[edit]

This is a neutral notice that an RfC has been opened at an article which you have edited within the past year. It is at Talk:Clint Eastwood#8 children by 6 women. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:30, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Plan 9 from Outer Space[edit]

Hello Dimadick. I noticed your interest in, and extensive work on, the Plan 9 article. I should point out that Hugh Thomas is both credited and uncredited. He is uncredited as a gravedigger. But he does have an Associate Producer credit in the original print, which still survives in some of the online versions. You'll see it on one of those cardboard "headstones". Hugh Thomas is dead, but his younger sister, Mary Davis, lives in Atlanta. She is a good friend. Hugh Thomas funded much of the production from an inheritance that he "appropriated" from his kid sister (she was in her teens at the time, and knew nothing about how her money was being spent), and from his mother. The other members of the Baptist Church were minor contributors. I have been trying to get that information (along with a number of other interesting details) in print, so that it can be included in the article with an authoritative reference. But it is hard to get a reliable source interested in such an old story. Only fanzines, which can't be cited, seem interested. So, if you get a chance, you might want to look at one of those archived (online) versions of the print to confirm that Hugh Thomas is, indeed, credited. Gulbenk (talk) 19:58, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Category_talk:Women_and_death[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Category_talk:Women_and_death. Since you participated in a previous discussion about this category. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:48, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


Please refer to the page Talk:Pietro Paolo Cristofari. Thanks. Kenchikka (talk) 00:10, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I will contact him. Grateful! Kenchikka (talk) 00:19, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Too bad, he has already not edited since January 2012! What to do? Kenchikka (talk) 00:22, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps you could search for further information on Cristofari on googlebooks. If there is a better source on the subject, you can effectively rewrite the stub article and remove the erroneous information. Dimadick (talk) 00:25, 17 November 2013 (UTC)


I see you already found the discussion at Category talk:Martial arts media. I thought User:Jmcw37 made a valid point - certainly a search using categories mixes up factual and fictional characters when they are included in the tree but I also (as noted in the above discussion) don't see a good alternative. Is there a clearer Wiki policy statement then the one User:Jmcw37 quoted and should this be taken somewhere to get a larger consensus.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:58, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

I am going by the practice of Category:People which includes Category:Fictional characters as a subcategory, and note that most of its categories have fictional subcategories. Category:Politicians has subcategory Fictional politicians, Category:Archaeologists has subcategory Category:Fictional archaeologists, etc. It has been the de facto consensus for several years, though I am not aware of any specific statement on the matter. Dimadick (talk) 10:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Point taken. I'ld like to see what User:Jmcw37 thinks on the matter and maybe this is something that should be taken to the wider community. Cheers.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:23, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

December 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to She Was an Acrobat's Daughter 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:
  • is depicted among the lyrics, and the audience sings its content: "please do not spit on the floor").<ref name="Hartley">{{cite web|url=
  • Steve, ''That's All Folks!: The Art of Warner Bros. Animation'', [[Henry Holt and Company]], 1990)

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:00, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Slingshot 6 7/8, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tenderfoot (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) 09:01, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Philosophy[edit]

Greetings, I really appreciate the contributions that you have made in adding articles and categories to WP:PHILO via the project banner. Other than myself, you are probably the next most prolific editor in this regard. I think you are a little over-inclusive, but I don't really mind too much, as I would rather have those articles covered than missing, and since they show up in the log, it is nice to have the option of removing them, rather than just not knowing about them at all. With that said, not every issue that can be analysed philosophically is a topic in the project. If that were the case all of wikipedia would be covered. Usually, it is limited to philosophers, philosophical concepts, and literature. This doesn't include every application of philosophical concepts (like corruption in every particular nation, for instance. I am also a little dubious that the theology project applied to any of those either). I wouldn't even say anything, except when it's a dozen new arrivals, it gets to be a chore. Thanks, and keep up the great work. Greg Bard (talk) 21:42, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

To be honest, I see which Wikiprojects cover the central article on any given concept and add them to the localized versions as well. "Corruption" has long been added to Wikiproject Philosophy, under the ethics taskforce, thus the addition. Philosophy still covers aesthetics, right? Dimadick (talk) 23:12, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Yes, that is a pretty good guideline, but again, philosophy covers the abstract concept (e.g. "hope" or "love") not every instance in the world of those concepts. Aesthetics is a major branch of philosophy, but the visual arts project takes over for individual works of art. A good guideline is whether or not there is a philosophy academic from a credible institution who writes about that subject in a philosophy journal, or teaches about that subject in a philosophy class. Greg Bard (talk) 23:29, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Category talk pages[edit]

Maybe it is just convenience that you add a template with them, but when you add project tags on talk pages that are category talk pages - class and importance are surely red-herrings as they do not show up anyways... and to actually fill those in on category pages is strange, they do not register... satusuro 10:18, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually these are mistakes, I usually try to erase the ratings from the banner I copy. Thanks for correcting it. Dimadick (talk) 10:19, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

So far I was just watching and noticing without comment or editing, my apologies I have been critical of quite a few other editors recently, and have to reign in my enthusiasms! , if I find any more in the near future, I will correct them - have a good new year satusuro 10:27, 10 January 2014 (UTC)


Hi Dimadick

I just spotted this edit by you. I am puzzled; why you think that Category:Astronauts falls within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:53, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Because they are listed as a topic in Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Encyclopedic articles. Dimadick (talk) 06:38, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

That list includes the following entry: "Astronauts, ancient or Ancient astronauts". However, there is nothing in the article astronauts about pre-20th century stuff, which is all in ancient astronauts and Category:Ancient astronaut speculation.
It's good to see that Category:Ancient astronaut speculation is tagged in this way, but it seems to me that your tagging of Category:Astronauts was mistaken, and should be reverted. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


Hi. I am conducting a survey of most active Wikipedians, regarding reasons they may reduce their activity. I would be very interested in having you participate in it. Would you be interested? (If you reply to me here, please WP:ECHO me). Thank you for your consideration, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:42, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Why not? Dimadick (talk) 13:45, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Spring Fever (1982 film) 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:
  • [[Category:Film scores by Fred Mollin]]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Alien Trespass 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:
  • [[Gary Westfahl]], a reviewer of [science fiction]], found this film and ''[[The Man from Earth]]'' (2007) to be overlooked gems of the genre. He

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:44, 29 January 2014 (UTC) returns![edit]

hello? I have a problem with a persistent IP vandal that has returned. whoever has the IP address stated is disrupting Looney Tunes articles by either overlinking or adding links to things unrelated to the article. request crackdown on these edits. Visokor (talk) 07:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hell-Bent for Election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Social Security (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) 08:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

About your recent edits on Walt Disney[edit]

I appreciate your effort on this article. I know you'd feel that your edits shall not be perished, and I agree with it. However, your edits (see here) have caused numerous citation errors, and the two sections you worked on are now way too large, and hence are given WP:Undue weight. I suggest that you revert the whole thing back to the original by editing the edit version before yours. Then we can discuss how to improve this article together. Don't worry, all your sources can still be found in the revision history. Please consider my suggestion. Forbidden User (talk) 13:52, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Undue Weight? In an article with such a large Legacy section? I would think they are too short. Dimadick (talk) 08:47, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

The two subsections you worked on are only part of the Beginnings section. Also, the two of them combined are larger than the Legacy section already. Still thinking they're too short? By the way, I've posted on the talk page about a new section, which consists of biographical contents. Feel free to join. Forbidden User (talk) 15:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
I'll be off until 25 June. If you wish to continue our discussion, please wait until then. Thanks.Forbidden User (talk) 10:36, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Early life of Walt Disney[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Early life of Walt Disney, and it appears to include material copied directly from

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 14:47, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

This should be the reason why your link to the page was red-linked. It seems you have addressed the issue, and so I probably won't revert your template again. Thank you for your effort. Welcome to discuss on June 25.Forbidden User (talk) 05:46, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


You have been mentioned at AN/I - thought you might be interested to know that - cheers satusuro 03:33, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ Nathaniel Philbrick. Mayflower: A story of Courage, Community and War (Viking 2006) p. 125-126
  2. ^ "Modern History Sourcebook: William Bradford: from History of Plymouth Plantation, c. 1650". Internet Modern History Sourcebook. Retrieved 27 October 2010.