User talk:Mamalujo

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

p.193[edit]

what does Cornwell say on p.193 of pope in winter - why would he 'debunk' his own work. I don't understand. The sentence 'Much praise of Cornwell centered around his disputed claim that he was a practising catholic who had attempted to absolve Pius with his work' - i can't understand that , and the ref to 'Sanchez, 2002' is not helpful. which book is that? Looks like drivel, oh no!!!!Sayerslle (talk) 14:44, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Howdy[edit]

Citation Needed in Philosophy[edit]

Hey Mamalujo! :) I've been looking to improve Philosophy and saw that there was a mention of "'golden age' of the twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in the Latin West" you made on May 21, 2010. Do you know where I'll be able to find a source for that golden age? I also noticed that there's a mention of a similar golden age by Paulatim on Medieval Philosophy. Is this the same golden age you were referring to? Would you be able to leave a short message on the talk page with any helpful information? :) Keep up the good work! Thanks, Matt (talk) 07:09, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

LOL[edit]

So, the most ardent proponent of removal of the quote shows up a month and a half after the RFC. Better late than never, lol.– Lionel (talk) 01:09, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Bosco[edit]

Hi, It looks like you were one of the main contributors to the John Bosco page. Anyway, FYI some of the unsourced items there are likely to be deleted soon, so I thought you should know, in case you want to touch them up with references. I do not really know enough about Bosco to jump into that page, so you may want to do that if you feel like it. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 15:12, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Nonfree image on your userpage[edit]

Per the policies on the usage of non-free images on Wikipedia, non-free images are not allowed on pages outside of the article namespace, including userpages. The Faberge egg image on your user page are copyrighted and unlicensed, so I had to remove it. I'm sorry if you are upset by my editing your page without your permission, but this is a rule where Wikipedia allows no exceptions. I want to make sure you know that this isn't personal. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, or to seek another editor's opinion at the WP:MCQ discussion board. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Cristiada (film)[edit]

Thank you from the DYK team at Wikipedia Graeme Bartlett (talk) 18:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring[edit]

You have clearly been edit warring against multiple editors on William Morgan (anti-Mason), both under this account and as User:66.74.166.103. Further reverts will likely result in a block. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:07, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Complaint about your edits at WP:AN3[edit]

It looks like you've been warring across a variety of articles to ensure that Category:People assasinated by Freemasons contains entries. Unless you can point to a discussion somewhere where you got support from other editors for this, the closing admin at WP:AN3 may take a dim view of this activity. It also appears that you may have been using an IP to assist you in the war. If you will agree to stop pushing this category until others support you, this report might be closed. EdJohnston (talk) 22:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Mamalujo has stated his intent to move on and his contribs substantiate this. I think we're good here.– Lionel (talk) 23:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I can see what Sarek is up to. Stay strong. JASpencer (talk) 18:34, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Iamdumdum[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent 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. Ubelowme U Me 22:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Merge La Vang and Our Lady of La Vang ?[edit]

I've noticed that these two articles cover more or less identical subject matter. I think that they probably should be merged, but I haven't formally proposed merging them. Since you probably know more about the topic than I do, I thought I'd give you the first crack at addressing the issue. What do you think? -- Cuppysfriend (talk) 16:48, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ars Disputandi[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Ars Disputandi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The sole source used for article proves it exists but does nothing at all to establish that it is notable. Article does not seem to meet WP:GNG standards in the slightest.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DreamGuy (talk) 03:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Ars Disputandi for deletion[edit]

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. DreamGuy (talk) 02:24, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

File:MonstranceGuad.jpg missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 09:01, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

June 2013[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Technopat. I noticed that you recently removed some content without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Technopat (talk) 21:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Your opinion is needed in this discussion on Talk:Zeitgeist: The Movie[edit]

Hi. Two editors are advocating for the exclusion of any mention in the Zeitgeist: The Movie article that Peter Joseph, the creator of that film has stated publicly that words attributed to him in a story cited as a source in the article misquoted him, and that he has not distanced himself from the ideas expressed in that film, as that cited source indicates. I have responded to their arguments, but neither of them has responded directly to my counterarguments, but simply repeat the same statements of theirs over and over. Myself and one other editor disagree with them, so two editors are for the material's inclusion, and two are for its exclusion, with no sign of consensus in sight. Can you please offer your viewpoint in the discussion so that we can achieve consensus? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 01:12, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Larkin, Church and State[edit]

Please see Talk:Louis André#Larkin, Church and State -- PBS (talk) 13:18, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Ars Disputandi for deletion[edit]

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

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ars Disputandi (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DreamGuy (talk) 03:06, 30 November 2013 (UTC)