User talk:Johnbod

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.
Dirty angel from the Monumental Cemetery of Staglieno in Genoa, c.1910

Disambiguation link notification for April 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Power of Women (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Spinning, Samson and Delilah and James Snyder
Bocca della Verità (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to James Snyder
Yael (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Samson and Delilah

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

General Sanctions: Electronic Cigarettes.[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg Please read this notification carefully:
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to electronic cigarettes.
The details of these sanctions are described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

SPACKlick (talk) 12:17, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Herodias, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Feast of Herod (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) 11:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Precious again[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

casing of art
Thank you for casing in your articles the treasures of art, books and knowledge, like some medieval manuscripts were luxuriously bound in gold, silver and jewels, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (17 December 2009)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Three years ago, you were the 97th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda! and thanks for all your work too! Johnbod (talk) 12:24, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Conditional Election[edit]

Hi mate, I see you reverted my change to propose Conditional Election for deletion. However, you didn't explain why. Did you want me to open up a full deletion process, have I inadvertently proposed for deletion something that's already been proposed before? SourAcidHoldout (talk) 05:12, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

No, you've proposed for deletion a concept that is totally notable, and easily verifiable (even if unreferenced) - see my comment at your ANI section, and [1]. You are making edits that are clearly out of your depth at present, and should find a less drastic way of editing until you are more experienced. Is ussgest you only add things, since you have little idea what to delete. Johnbod (talk) 13:38, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joachim Wtewael, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ceres, Lazarus and Goltzius (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) 09:06, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Hillary Rodham Clinton - Move Discussion[edit]

Hi,

This is a notification to let you know that there is a requested move discussion ongoing at Talk:Hillary_Rodham_Clinton/April_2015_move_request#Requested_move. You are receiving this notification because you have previously participated in some capacity in naming discussions related to the article in question.

Thanks. And have a nice day. NickCT (talk) 18:41, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Power of Women[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:01, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Archducal hat (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Margaret of Austria
Muqarnas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Vaulting

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Conrad Meit[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:02, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

A CFD discussion you may be interested in - Churches/Church buildings[edit]

As a participent in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 October 17#Category:Churches, you may be interested in knowing that I've just initiated a new CFR discussion to fix the whole tree - Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 May 1#Churches/Church buildings. Feel free to participate there. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 03:41, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

funerary art fa[edit]

Hello Johnbod, I used to be Ling.Nut. Hope everything is going well for you! Sandy is apparently reviewing all old FAs or something. Do yo feel up to looking at Funerary art to see if it's still up to snuff? I haven't even glanced at the page in years. • ArchReader 09:36, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi! I have, a few times. Little has changed. It is, and always will be, incomplete, but I think otherwise ok. I'm not sure Sandy's review covers stuff that recent. Maybe. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 15:40, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually it does (2010 - wow), but I have done a 5,000 mile service. Johnbod (talk) 00:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
How come I don't remember you two working together on that? Sheeeeesh, I'm getting old in here. In the "olden days", FAR ran about two to three years behind on generating a WP:URFA list, but in 2010, FAR fell off the map, so now we are ... well ... probably too many years behind to catch up. Time flies ... 2010 FAs have had four or five years to deteriorate! But there are so so many missing nominators, that I'm not seeing how we can pretend to review all old FAs, so we need to focus on the abandoned ones. If we can at least prune out those that are being watched, we may have a chance to identify the worst of the lot. It was sure nice of NuttyLing to show up in the midst of this effort! Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:30, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Quite a lot of them won't have changed much - like mine & Iri's. One advantage of obscure subjects, and declining editing .... Others do a lot of watching of mine. Are you finding many really deteriorated ones? Johnbod (talk) 01:34, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
More than I'm comfortable with ... a good number of the unwatched FAs are in pop culture topics, and are probably hard hit. A concern right now is to figure out how we will approach the matter of so many missing nominators, but we should have a better sense of the scope of the problem after a couple more weeks of slowly pinging in the most active nominators, and carefully pruning based on their responses. It's frightful how many big fat RETIRED messages I'm finding among FA writers. In those cases, I'm not even trying (yet) to glance at their articles, because it will be too depressing, I fear. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, the attrition among article writers has been awful, and is ongoing, though some do come back, often on a more limited scale. Actually I think WP is a more comfortable & easier atmosphere for experienced editors than 5 years ago, if only because there are fewer other editors and actually the mechanisms for suppressing troublemakers of various kinds work better than they did. Johnbod (talk) 15:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
While that is perhaps broadly true, for me, student editing is killing it ... and there aren't enough other editors to contain and deal with all the damage. If you consider that I resigned as FAC delegate to deal with medical content and student editing, one wonders if I have accomplished ... anything at all. Student editing issues got dramatically worse, FA writing and reviewing declined broadly, and FAR fell off the map ... and Chavez/Venezuela are still a POV wreck. So, what am I doing in here anyway? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Lots of good stuff! really. At least there will be a break on the student editing for a while. It's odd how bad it mostly is. Keep on keeping on! Johnbod (talk) 16:07, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey Baby!, the first on the list doesn't seem too bad. Johnbod (talk) 16:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Wars of the Roses Archiver[edit]

Just to clarify, was it set to archive after a month, and you reset it to two? If so, good catch. Cheers! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 17:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I hope that's what I did! Thanks. Johnbod (talk) 17:31, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Bull (painting), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page United Provinces (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) 10:17, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Arty stuff in York[edit]

Hi John, Long time no speak! Hope all's well with you! I've just wanted to point you to a couple of things that art history related things that are going on in York at the moment. Firstly, I've managed to start an Art History WikiClub with the student art history society at the University. We've only met once so far but I thought you might want to keep an eye on it and possibly partner with keener editors (should they emerge!?). Hopefully, they'll get keen and they're access to resources will lead to great things! Also, we're getting more and more of York Art Gallery's collection up (CommonsCat here) and there are potentially some useful images. I'm getting my head around the GWToolset but in the meantime you can download and reuse images from the online collection as you wish: YMT Online collections. Let me know if you have any thoughts! Unfortunately other art collections in the region have been a little sluggish responding but fingers crossed. Cheers, PatHadley (talk) 12:28, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Cheers! See you're already on it! PatHadley (talk) 14:37, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Notice[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is AusLondonder's battleground conduct. Thank you. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 17:05, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Hullo[edit]

Hello old friend...I was pleased to see that you edited Delacroix's Women of Algiers, I created an article on Picasso's series inspired by the painting ahead of Version O's New York City One Night Only Mega Sale tonight. Any help would be much loved. I expect it shall be bought tonight by a secretive billionaire collector (or not), so we could DYK it in time. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 20:45, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Just been watching it on the news. but it's not my period at all! I'll take a look. Johnbod (talk) 00:30, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Medical FA edit notice[edit]

I just noticed I never put one of these:

User:SandyGeorgia/sandbox#Medical_FA_editnotice

at Pancreatic cancer. If you look through them (for example coeliac and ketogenic), you'll see we can also deal with ENGVAR. Do you want me to install one? If so, which variety? I try to keep track of them in my sandbox should we ever need to change them. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:28, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes please - we are talking about tumors there. Johnbod (talk) 16:32, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
OK ... I forget ... British English? That is, can I just copy this one? Template:Editnotices/Page/Coeliac disease SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
No, American. We use "tumour". Johnbod (talk) 16:41, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Geeez, archive your talk page ... all this scrolling down is giving me arthritis (and anxiety, since it's taking me so long to respond)!!! LOL.

OK, then I think that means I have to craft new wording, because I am confused. It uses American English except for the word tumour? I am not up on different varieties of English ... isn't tumour British ? See samples: Template:Editnotices/Page/Chagas disease doesn't mention any language issues, while Template:Editnotices/Page/Coeliac disease does. Which do you want? Or do I need to customize it? Anyway, I guess you know then that it will come up on every edit, and only sysops or template editors can change it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:50, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the archive :) OK, I get it now. By "we" above, you were referring to the British, not the article! SO, I'll install the generic version then. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:06, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Beverley[edit]

Hi, I noticed that you have been reverting edits changing VikingNorsemen, can you have a look at this edit to Beverley and see if it should also be reverted. Many thanks. Keith D (talk) 17:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, done. Johnbod (talk) 18:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Keith D (talk) 22:22, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Guidance on commas after Jr. and Sr.[edit]

Following the closure of a recent RfC you participated in, I have started an RfC on the separate but related issue of commas after Jr. and Sr.. Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) § RfC: Guidance on commas after Jr. and Sr. and feel free to comment there. Thanks! sroc 💬 06:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Matisse/Picasso/Seurat[edit]

Not sure if you're the right person to ask, but thought I'd check, since I know you're knowledgeable on art topics. I'm getting rid of thousands of books, and among them are some collections single-artist coffee table books. In many cases these books are worth essentially nothing; I can sell them on eBay for maybe a dollar or two. Am I right in thinking that if I slice out the pages and scan the pictures I can upload them to commons? The books are published in the 60s to 80s, generally, but of course I'm only talking about paintings that were painted before 1923. Is this worth doing? Or are most well-known artists now well represented on commons? It's not zero effort, so I'd rather not unless it has value. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:01, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure on either score I'm afraid. Scans from books, especially ones printed pre- the 80s are generally low quality. I think the US law refers to works published before 1923, and perhaps only if in the US, which might mean publicly exhibited, or not. Seurat & Matisse at least are out of EU copyright (life + 70) so should be ok. Picasso certainly not on that basis. More obscure artists might be more useful. With Old Masters you know there are no copyright issues. I'd just pick a few examples & try to find them on Commons. Generally Commons coverage of the top 2 divisions (as it were) is pretty good, below that not. Hope that helps. Johnbod (talk) 12:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, I'll take a look on commons, and may ask at the image copyright page before doing anything. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Generations of Noah[edit]

In regard to Elamites being 'the' ancestors of the Persians.

I appreciate that you acknowledge the page's lack of credibility, however I do not recall the theory claiming that Persians were descended from Elamites, let alone that Elamites were 'the' ancestor of the Persians. I only recall it claiming that perhaps Elamites were descended from Elam-- an entirely separate topic of controversy I do not currently care to discuss-- as opposed to simply being an individual people of Haltamti.

Would you please either revert it to my previous edit, or at least include a citation which states that the theory refers to Elamites as the sole ancestor of the Persians?

No, this is talking about what some people believed 2,000 or so years ago. If you have problems with the text use the talk page. Johnbod (talk) 13:15, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I understand that, but I am asking for proof that they even believed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pahlavan Qahremani (talkcontribs) 15:35, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

The Flavius Josephus section is all referenced (and can easily be checked online I think), as is most of the article. If you are concerned about a bit that isn't, add a cite tag, or ask on talk. Or both. It's not an article I edit, but I will protect it from unjustified deletions. Johnbod (talk) 15:41, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I will add a cite tag. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pahlavan Qahremani (talkcontribs) 15:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I've reverted. The Josephus text is quoted, and linked to at the ref above. It is very clear. "6. 4. Shem, the third son of Noah, had five sons, who inhabited the land that began at Euphrates, and reached to the Indian Ocean. For Elam left behind him the Elamites, the ancestors of the Persians." All the article says is that Josephus wrote this. Johnbod (talk) 16:14, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if you add that Josephus believed it. Because it appears as though Josephus only believed Elamites came from Elam, and that the person who added this to the Wikipedia page believed Persians came from Elamites. Please add the citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pahlavan Qahremani (talkcontribs) 16:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

There are a string of direct quotations from Josephus, all covered by the reference at the top (currently # 25), with a link to the online text. That seems fine to me. A search on "Elam" there takes you straight to the passage. The quotation above is very clear. Johnbod (talk) 16:58, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I suppose if it is regarding itself as merely a quotation and not an absolute historic fact, I will let that specific topic go for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pahlavan Qahremani (talkcontribs) 17:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

WP: don't be lazy. Actually no: CS (common sense): don't be lazy[edit]

Hi. You did EXACTLY what I predicted on the article's talk page: instead of fixing the problem (art. IS A MESS, USELESS for the user who needs the basic info), you quoted some WP guideline that is NOT meant as a crutch for lazy editing, and removed... whatever I did to make the art. OF SOME PRACTICAL USE. WP is not meant as a playground for players of logic games, i.e. "how can I respect all guidelines", but as a WORK OF REFERENCE put out there TO OFFER GOOD, CONCISE INFO. For those who cannot grasp it, editing WP is a disservice to the users. Arminden (talk) 01:13, 21 May 2015 (UTC)Arminden

You could try actually reading it maybe. Johnbod (talk) 01:15, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Unlike you? Because I'll repeat here what I have written already: I DID and it took me AGES, and still w/o a clear answer. That's the difference between a WORK OF REFERENCE and a MANUAL. The latter u need to study from first to last page to pass the exam; the former is supposed to give a CONCISE, INTELLIGIBLE answer to a common answer like: what, where, when...? But if this still needs to be explained, it's a useless exercise.Arminden (talk) 01:20, 21 May 2015 (UTC)Arminden
I think you considerably overstate how concise Wikipedia is trying to be in longer articles. Adding shouty bolding for key points is just not our style. Johnbod (talk) 01:23, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Parliamentarians on fire[edit]

Thanks for the compliment earlier today regarding the 1836 map. I'm good at finding maps, but I have yet to find the treasure map that we all would like to get our hands on.  :-)Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:44, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I don't know where we are heading with that one. The natives seem most unfriendly. Johnbod (talk) 04:47, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 :-)Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Palmyra[edit]

You deleted a source about the sentence of Palmyrene art being more influenced by Parthia. A sentence you wrote and I sourced ! I think its rude to tell me that it is "better". Im planning on taking this to FA and I put a source to every sentence while you are adding a lot of stuffs without adding a source. Dont you think that it is better to explain about the Palmyrene art before explain it connection to Rome ? You made the section about Rome !--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 03:22, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

What's rude is to start editing a section someone else is working on, causing edit conflicts. Trust me, the article is a long way off FA quality, and adding vast numbers of low-quality sources won't help much. Johnbod (talk) 03:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Considering that I took it from a very low quality article into a GA and that an expert editor in FA told me that it is an FA quality then I beg to differ. The sources are not low quality. You should open them.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 03:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Anyway, lets not be childish, the article have a reference style and it would be nice to stick to it. The reference you are adding are in a different style, maybe you can make them consistent with the rest of the references. I have explained what is a Palmyrene art then I put the influence on Rome in its own paragraph. I hope its logical and not rude.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 03:34, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
(ec-again)Take it from another "expert editor in FA" that it isn't. Non-specialized would be more accurate. For art history art historians are what you need. You are welcome to reformat the refs, but I'm afraid I avoid cite templates. For FAC, I recommend getting the works used into a "references" section, with shorter citations for the text. Johnbod (talk) 03:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, that is one opinion I can respect. I prefer that a reader be able to read the sentences in the source. Now, can you explain about the Roman connection in their own paragraph ? its weird to talk about frontality and its influence on Rome without first explaining that Palmyrene art had frontality ! This article is about Palmyra, the focus in the beginning of the section should be first on its art before moving to show that it had no effect on Roman one !--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 03:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)