Leave a new message.
Please sign your message by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Due to some questions about conflict of interest issues with a document I helped author and publish, it seems appropriate that I disclose my connection and role vis-à-vis The CR FAQ. This information includes both the web document as well as the printed/dead tree version. I am one of the co-owners of the domain paganachd.com. The domain hosts The CR FAQ and related articles. This is not a commercial or even non-profit enterprise. There are no ads on the web site but there is a link to buy the printed version of the CR FAQ. All profits from sales the printed version are donated to An Comunn Gàidhealach Ameireaganach for Gaelic language preservation. The sole purpose of the web domain is to provide access to the collaboratively created document known as The CR FAQ and directly related articles. I believe The CR FAQ is a salientsecondary source document. I am also co-editor and co-publisher of the print version of the document, titled The CR FAQ - An Introduction to Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism. I mistakenly used the web site as a source in the Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism article before being clear on the COI problems of my actions. If you have any questions regarding my relationship to the domain and document, please ask me here on my talk page. (Note: I'm deliberately not using external links to the site or book to avoid using Wikipedia to drive traffic to them.)
It seems no one informed you that an article you weighed in on before, Nevill Drury, has been nominated for deletion. Actually, and strangely, the Talk page has been nominated for deletion. Here is a link to the Miscellany for Deletion page: . Much of the discussion is on the talk page of the article due to the confusion.
I couldn't find Ibid or Op. cit. anywhere on the page, and the only place Idem appeared was within the words epiology and epic. Where exactly is the problem? --220.127.116.11 (talk) 02:27, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
I have no idea what happened with putting the Ibid template in. Coincidentally, I ended up going over the article again with AutoWikiBrowser (AWB) a few hours later and it took the template out. AWB doesn't often make mistakes (or I've rarely caught it making mistakes like this) but this looks like one. No idea what set it off but it looks fine now. Cheers, Pigman☿/talk 05:28, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Well, it moved the Ibid tag from Notes to References. I finally found the problem. The Ibid did not show up in the displayed text because it was part of a duplicate named reference.
I didn't find it until I clicked  and checked the inner code. AWB should have caught the duplicate reference thingy. Anyway, problem solved. Thank you. --18.104.22.168 (talk) 17:43, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Glad you found it. I went over the article when you brought it to my attention and couldn't find the "ibid" either. Then again, I didn't notice that AWB had only moved the template between edits so my attention to detail is apparently not too good at the moment. Cheers, Pigman☿/talk 17:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC)