User talk:Hroðulf

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Perhaps you're looking for Hrodulf? (not Hroðulf aka Hrothulf) See User:Hroðulf/disambiguation
en This user is a native speaker of English.
fr-3 Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau avancé de français.
de-1 Dieser Benutzer hat grundlegende Deutschkenntnisse.
sco-1 This uiser can contreibute wi a laich level o Scots.
Search user languages


Thanks for finishing the AfC on his Te Deum. 'DGG (at NYPL)' (talk) 21:39, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing!
If you still visit the library or access periodicals, could you do me a favour? Most of the refs in Te Deum (Kodály) are to dead trees. Yet many of the refs were "ibids" that got scrambled up when the OP ran a ref correction tool. I am sure I made matters worse when I cleaned up the article for mainspace. (I guessed that all the ibids were to the Cecil Gray article, which is almost certainly not correct.) Could you have a go at correcting them, please? The OP may be in a better position to do this, but I don't think they are active on Wikipedia.
--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:25, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Request undeletion of Sophie (software)[edit]

Hello Stifle, Six years ago you closed the AfD on this article, which was deleted on notability grounds. Since 2008, several more papers appeared in the peer-reviewed literature.

Per the deletion review rules, I am asking you before posting there. Please consider undeleting or userfying Sophie (software), so that it can be cleaned up and updated, or if necessary merged with another article.

-- Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:43, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Userfied to User:Hroðulf/Sophie (software). Stifle (talk) 19:30, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:35, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Responded to your suggestion[edit]

I've responded to your suggestion, at Talk:Bomis/GA1.

Thanks very much for your recommendation, the article is better for it.


Cirt (talk) 20:07, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I followed up at the above link. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:23, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

ITV vandal[edit]

Hi. Thanks for catching this one early. I'm very convinced this is the IP-hopper I've met several times before -- see here. Nick Levine (talk) 12:45, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

It is funny you say that: I didn't catch anything - I actually accepted the changes to Catchphrase (UK game show). I merely asked them to use edit summaries. That is a troublesome pattern you have been watching. How do you tell the fact from the hoax? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 12:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Their editing pattern stands out. You saw something was odd even though you didn't know you were looking for it! I've been watching this for about a month but it goes back further - see my talk page for examples and also for discussion I've had with other editors about how/whether to revert. See also here.
The pattern is: BT Openzone IPs, edits every 5-10 minutes over several hours (today being an exception to this!), apparently random edits to ITV related pages, nonsense edit summaries (sometimes proveably so, eg when all the summaries say Undid revision 583137604 by My name is not dave and all cite the same revision number). I half suspect the damge is automated, but can't think how to go about testing that out. And all this said, it's possible I got this one wrong. In which case the human concerned will do something different (talk to me, perhaps?) Nick Levine (talk) 13:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Peptide page[edit]

Hi and thank you for your message about my contribution to the peptide page. I don't really understand why you said it is adverstising as when i did my searches I often found the commercial name Matrixyl as from the pages listed below and I found it was discovered by a French company which has produced many others. So it is an interesting reference for readers.,

Please let me know your thoughts as I spent a long time wirting this contribution.


Pcriton (talk) 08:57, 28 January 2014 (UTC)pcriton

Robert Lewandowski[edit]

He won't be playing for Bayern until July and has played for Borussia Dortmund since the contract was signed. Kingjeff (talk) 18:55, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

"Incompetent editor who pushes fringe views" thread on ANI: looking for suggestions for way forward[edit]

Since you commented just once on the thread on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and seem pretty disinterested and concerned for the welfare of RetProf I'm coming to you for advice on what to do next - because that discussion is going nowhere and the problem isn't getting resolved.

As I see it, RetProf's problem has two dimensions. The first is that he's concerned over a revert on Gospel of Matthew that I made some time ago. Here's the diff: edit. In a nutshell, he'd put in material saying that there's an ancient mss of GM which includes a superscript to the effect that Matthew the Apostle wrote it. RetProf calls this an "attestation", which is a good-enough term.

RetProf says he wants a source - for the deletion, apparently. I've tried explaining that I can't source a deletion, and, more to the point, the class of attestations to which his example belongs is well known to scholars, but uniformly dismissed - they all derive from a single tradition, so have no independent vale, and the weight of other evidence is that the gospel can't be by Matthew, and was written in Greek. I believe I've pointed him to books saying this is the current consensus, but it seems to have no impact.

Anyway, that's what sparked this current row. The deeper problem is that RetProf keeps returning to this over months and years - he makes an edit inserting Hebrew Matthew, someone deletes, he goes away for a while, than months later he does it again. That's not a problem I'm worried about, but it's what the other editors are concerned about - they just want him to stop.

So what to do? I think the dispute processes have hardly been touched, to tell the truth, because he always backs off at any sign of resistance, only to come back months later. So what's the best step? An external mediator? If so, how is one found? PiCo (talk) 01:33, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I am disinterested, to a degree. I recall reading many years ago that Matthew was possibly written by a Jewish person or Aramaic speaker for a Jewish audience, though I don't know if or how it should be reflected in the article.
My concern isn't for the welfare of any of the editors involved, but for the quality of the article. An ArbCom hearing is likely to leave everyone that cares one way or the other banned from the article (or at least distracted for the duration of the hearing) and will only address behaviour not content. In my humble opinion, it is always a mistake to jump directly from an argument to a request for arbitration without exploring the alternatives.
In my opinion you are right: you can't source a deletion.
I get an impression, which might be mistaken, that misguided opinions of the Church Fathers are dismissed as fringe theories by some editors. I think some middle ground could be found on that aspect. After all, nobody believes in the religion of Ancient Egypt any more, yet it has Wikipedia articles. (Perhaps the same could be said for Pelagianism or Flat Earthers or any number of unusual or obsolete world views.)
Isn't there a register of volunteer mediators somewhere on Wikipedia?
I have notified RetProf about this conversation.
--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:34, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I believe that if I write @RetProf the system automatically will alert him that he's been mentioned.I hope.
Anyway, the ANI discussion seems to have reached a pretty good conclusion - half a dozen or more people, including RetProf, have said they favour formal mediation. My own note has added that the mediator should be asked to provide a binding resolution, and that the parties agree to accept arbitration if they can't accept/keep the resolution.
On the matter of Gospel of Matthew, the lead of the article and the section on composition jointly say that the author was anonymous and Jewish and wrote for a Jewish Christian audience (meaning a community of Jews who accepted that Jesus was the messiah - something the majority of Jews did not do in the late 1st century and which led to the final split between Jews and Christians). All with reliable sources supplied. ::RetProf's sources are reliable too - it's just that he keeps misreading and misrepresenting them, not deliberately, but because he's just not very good at critical reading, despite his claim to be a retired academic. Yet when I look at his user page it says he spent his career working in Africa, including with the anti-apartheid movement. I like him, and that's why this is personally painful.
I'll leave a message on his talk page suggesting he start approaching people on the mediator panel - best if he chooses his own mediator, as I'm pretty sure he's going to get the rough end of the pineapple and I don't want him feeling he's been framed. PiCo (talk) 05:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


A proposal has been made to create a Live Feed to enhance the processing of Articles for Creation and Drafts. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to create a 'Special:NewDraftsFeed' system. Your comments are welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Please see[edit]

User:Smallbones/Questions on FTC rules - Smallbones(smalltalk) 15:51, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Shirley Temple[edit]

Hello, I'm Anup. No source confirms the date of death of Shirley Temple (If you do not mind to re-read the sources again). And You keep introducing original research. Can you please explain? If you've some source that says, Feb 10 or Feb 11, cite it in the body of the article. Thanks, Anupmehra -Let's talk! 11:31, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

@Anupmehra: Trumplump added a BBC article that says She died on Monday at home ... bbc. Sorry I said 'warring' in my edit summary - your edit was in good faith. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:37, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. Happy editing! Regards, Anupmehra -Let's talk! 11:49, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Andhra Pradesh and Telangana[edit]

Though Andhra Pradesh and Telangana have a joint capital as hyderabad for 10 years, The powers ruling the capital i.e. hyderabad goes to Telangana State only. So Technically, Hyderabad is just an acting capital for AP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahesh13j (talkcontribs) 09:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Mahesh13j: Naturally. When the Act is implemented, why not put "acting capital"? It is easier to understand than 'no capital'. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:41, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure![edit]

TWA guide left bottom.png
Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 08:50, Saturday August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Get Help
About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Explanation for new user please[edit]

Please post a close explanation at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2014_January_14#File:New_Chippenham_Campus.jpg.

Cassie.reid (talk · contribs) is a new user and won't be able to understand that their upload was deleted even though I added a discussion of the image to the article the text. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:16, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Done - on both the discussion and the user's talk page. I read through the comments on the talk page and see a common problem. She works for them in a promotional role and like many only came here to fix errors in here company's article. The long learning period to get your head around Wikipedia is then absent and frustration ensues. - Peripitus (Talk) 11:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your patient attention explaining the AfD and reading the talk page, Peripitus.
I agree about the learning period. I like to help newcomers understand us, because aaronsw's research said that most of the encyclopedia text is written by the long tail of hundreds of thousands of editors who are only interested in 1 or 2 articles, rather than the few thousand at the core who make the most edits. Patient, specific explanation from the horse's mouth helps a lot. Even if she never comes back here, I bet she will tell others about her experience.
--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:44, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Olga Taussky-Todd, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Austrian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Orthodox Presbyterian Church[edit]

Greetings! I deleted the part that offended StAnselm. Would it be possible to reinsert the sentences now? Thank you for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamduker (talkcontribs) 16:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments on my draft of the Project AGORA article and UC-HiPACC article[edit]

Possibly to clarify, I am a contractor for University of California, Santa Cruz, specifically, hired to be webmaster of the University of California High-Performance AstroComputing Center ("UC-HiPACC"). UC-HiPACC is a co-sponsor of Project AGORA.

As to the AGORA Project, I think it's notable that shows that the technical paper describing the project has been accepted by the Astrophysical Journal Supplement, a prestigious scientific journal. As displayed at the arxiv link, the authors of the paper are Astrophysicists from 27 institutions around the world, and thus the project is vast in scope. The technical paper is footnoted in my draft Wikipedia article, as are references to two other outside publications, Universe Today and Science Daily. There is a website for the project,, referenced by footnote, managed by an astrophysicist at the California Institute of Technology, which is not part of the University of California. The project is supported by the National Science Foundation, among others, according to this website. I would think that students of Astrophysics should be able to find out about this project so as to keep abreast of such a major developments in the field. I will happily leave it to the wisdom of the Wikipedia community to decide, based on its merits, the worthiness this article for inclusion in the Encyclopedia.

As to the UC-HiPACC article, I will follow the procedures you outline for suggested changes or updates to the article.

Thank you for taking the time to help me with my Wikipedia work! Sjzaslaw (talk) 18:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

@Sjzaslaw: Steve, it is good to hear from you. I downloaded the paper a few hours ago, and, though I didn't read it all, I appreciate the eminence and scope of the enterprise. Students of astronomy might learn about AGORA better in the journals and from your website. I would like it to be in Wikipedia, but I fear that without significant coverage outside the Universe Today piece, it is likely to quickly be the subject of an Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion discussion. (I didn't mention Science Daily as it simply republished UCSC's press release.) As far as I can tell, lots of big ideas have one paper in a major journal, and their articles get deleted. It seems odd when we have articles on Pokemon characters. If you don't mind a wider debate and the risk of deletion, then by all means get the full copyright release, or rewrite, and see if an AFC reviewer will accept the article. Until then I'll move it from the AFC queue for you to work on (you should soon see an automated message about that.) --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 18:52, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Removal of a text[edit]

I added a person's name "Oommen Chandy" in "List of Indian Christians" page. I gave government site as reference as he is presently Chief Minister of Kerala. Still it is removed. Please help me to understand why it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robin7013 (talkcontribs) 04:24, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

@Robin7013: The government website only tells us his job. You need to post a reliable source for his religion. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 18:06, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:EastofEnglandlogo.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:EastofEnglandlogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Of Human Feelings[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Of Human Feelings. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 31 July 2014 (UTC)