User talk:John Hill

---

Archives
2005 – 2006 Jan. 2007 – June 2007 July 2007 – December 2007 January 2008 – December 2008 January 2009 – December 2009 January 2010 – December 2010 January 2011 – December 2011

---

---

The Bathysphere

Hi John,

If you’ve been following my progress on the William Beebe article, you’ll know that I’ve been adding information about Beebe’s life in chronological order, and I’m now at the point in his life right before the beginning of his bathysphere dives. I’ve encountered a potential difficulty related to this. There is probably about as much source material describing Beebe’s bathysphere dives as there is about the rest of his life combined, and if I go into as much detail about this as the source material does, the section about his bathysphere dives is going to completely overwhelm the rest of the article. It’ll also probably make the article too long. However, a lot of this information is definitely notable and still deserves to be included on Wikipedia.

What I’m thinking of doing is expanding the Bathysphere (vessel) article to provide a detailed account of this, and then only providing a link and a shorter summary in the Beebe article. If I do this, though, I’ll want to write the detailed account for the Bathysphere article before I write the summary for the Beebe article, because I think it’ll be easier for me to do things in that order. So this would mean having to stop working on the Beebe article for as long as it takes me to make my expansion of the Bathysphere article. Is it all right with you if I temporarily leave the Beebe article in its current half-finished state while I do this? --Captain Occam (talk) 10:43, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Chinese townships

Hello Master John! Fab work as normal on the Xinijiang townships. I did create a List of township-level divisions of Xinjiang which needs filling out like List of township-level divisions of Anhui.Eventually it would be nice to have articles on every township level division in China and templates for every prefecture like Template:Anqing!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Aw, you're too kind. Thanks friend. Lovely to see you writing good articles on places in Xinjiang!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:58, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Filipina poets

Category:Filipina poets, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. ukexpat (talk) 16:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your review of Ivy Alvarez for DYK

Hi John! Thank you so much for reviewing my biography of Ivy Alvarez for DYK, and for saying nice things about it. Have a wonderful day!--DracoEssentialis (talk) 22:07, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello, John Hill. You have new messages at DracoEssentialis's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, John Hill. You have new messages at Template_talk:Did_you_know#James_R._Whelan.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Two unrelated things

So I responded to your comment about the James R. Whelan DYK, which hopefully you can address. But also on a totally unrelated note (I realized I can just combine the two of these, I originally didn't notice it was your nom) I found a grammatical problem at your nomination for Joseph Lennox Pawan, but proposed a solution that's hopefully acceptable. Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 00:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

• Well thank you! It's much appreciated, and your nom was definitely an interesting article to read. Is there any other issue that needs to be dealt with on the Whelan DYK, or is it possible that could be approved now? Thanks again! --Yaksar (let's chat) 05:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Muziris

Your comments on the talk page of Muziris really interested me. I am a Life Member of Kerala Council for Historical Research (KCHR) Friend’s Forum. KCHR is now busy with the Muziris Heritage Project and the excavations there.

I am planning to update the article after visiting the site in the near future. In the meanwhile I shall try to edit this article basing on the papers that I have received from KCHR. I am not sure whether Wikipedia will accept them as reliable sources.

The ancient name of this port was MuciriPattanam. So I think the article, Pattanam, be merged with this article Muziris.Neduvelilmathew (talk) 09:06, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Jat or Jatt tribes/clans of India

HI JOHN, COULD YOU A RECOMMEND A GOOD HISTORY BOOK ON THE JATT TRIBES/CLANS OF PAKISTAN/INDIA? I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU — Preceding unsigned comment added by B91FEG (talk • contribs) 18:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi! thanks for your note. As you must know if you have been keeping an eye on the Jat people and other Jat-related articles in the WP, the origins and history of the Jats is one of the most fiercely contested and argued about subjects in the Wikipedia. This is probably due to many factors including the fact that it is not certain that people who call themselves Jats (or Jatts) today all originated from the same group; the fact that they are divided into three major religious groups, Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims; that it is not really clear as to whether they should be considered an ethnic "tribe" or a caste (or many castes) or just as a community of people who consider themselves to be Jats; that many sources claim they were originally herdsmen or peasants but, several hundred years ago some became rulers in various states in India and so were referred to by themselves and the British conquerors as a "Royal" "race" or "caste"; that they have been ridiculed and put down by other groups of people and castes and, therefor,e some have tried to create a glorious history to counteract this abuse; that some have claimed divine descent (particularly from Krishna) and have made claims that this is "historical fact"; that others have claimed that they are the only "pure Aryans"; that some claim they are descended from Scythians, Huns and other tribes which invaded India, while others claim they originally left India only to return as one or the other of these tribes; that some claim they are closely related to the Gypsies of Europe and the subcontinent while others strongly deny this, etc., etc., etc. Because of all these conflicting claims and arguments (often held with the fervor one usually associates with fanatics) it is almost impossible to present any generally agreed upon history, and whatever position one takes one will be attacked by others with conflicting views. I myself have been threatened with physical violence several times for presenting what I thought were fairly balanced and non-controversial and well-refernced assertions. Additionally, many of the so-called "hisotries" of the Jats are clearly very one-sided and often seem quite fanatical or fantastic to non-Jat readers, frequently making all sorts of unsupported (or very poorly supported) and dubious claims.

So, to try to answer your question - no, I don't know of any history of Jats/Jatts that I could recommend as reliable. The one I have found most plausible and reasoned is: Forming an Identity: A Social History of the Jats. (1999). Nonica Datta and published by Oxford University Press, ISBN 019564719-X. But, I must warn you that, when I referred to this book and gave it as a reference on various pages on Wikipedia I was fiercely attacked and abused by people claiming it was terribly biased.

Sorry to be so negative, but the history of the Jats does seem to me to be such a touchy subject that almost anything written about it is sure to enrage one group or another. But, best wishes, and I do hope you may be able to help heal wounds and work towards a genearally agreed and well-backed history for this large and influential and very diverse group/caste/race/clan/community, or whatever you like to call it. My own personal experiences with my Jat friends throughout my life has been wonderfully enriching and I have great admiration for the vast majority of Jats - but I must warn you that there are certainly some very angry and mean Jat fanatics out there. With all best wishes, John Hill (talk) 02:26, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

A question about the William Beebe article

Hi John,

I’m sorry I haven’t had time to work on this article lately. I’m not finished with it yet, but I’ve recently become involved in another arbitration case, which has kept me occupied on Wikipedia for the past few weeks. I also see that you’ve added David Snow’s Birds in Our Life to the article’s reference section, so I’m assuming that this book contains some useful information about Beebe, and I’ve purchased a copy of it in order to use it as a source. It’s being shipped from England, though, and I live in the United States, so I’ll have to wait a while for it.

Anyway, there’s something I’ve been wanting to ask you about this article for whenever I get back to it. One of the sources that I’m using, Robert Welker’s biography, has some information that I think I’ll want to include related to A. E. Hill, Beebe’s physician during the last few years of his life. What I’d like to know is, is A. E. Hill the same person whom you’ve labeled as “Ted Hill” in the photographs that you’ve uploaded? If so, I think the labels on the photographs should be changed to call Dr. Hill the same thing that he’s called in the source material. I’m assuming that Ted Hill and A. E. Hill probably are the same person, but I’d like to make sure of that before changing the labels. --Captain Occam (talk) 17:42, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello, John Hill. You have new messages at Captain Occam's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Welcome John!

Hope you are well? ‡ Himalayan ‡ ^ΨMonastery 14:00, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Wording of "autonomous areas" at Tibet

Sorry, but I will interpret your addition of quotes, especially "so-called", to the term in that article as your own personal analysis, and possibly subtle unnecessary POV (not pushing though). Also, where did you go to if you spent more than 30 continuous days in China? I rarely hear of American tourists (?) spending in excess of even 21 days in that land. --HXL's Roundtable and Record 00:55, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

• I understand your point but "autonomous" in English means "independent". The Wiktionary defines "autonomous" as: "1.Self-governing. Governing independently," and for synonyms gives "(governing independently): sovereign, self-governing". See: [1]
• No region within the PRC, the UK, USA, Canada, Australia, India, etc., etc., can truly be considered "autonomous" as they come under the "central" or "federal" government. "Provinces," "states," "territories," etc., usually have some local government powers, but they cannot govern independently or be considered "sovereign" or "autonomous" states.
• I have been several times to China and together those trips add up to well over a month. Hope this answers your queries, Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 05:00, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Dubious source

Hi John, As the resident Jade Gate scholar, I wanted to ask your opinion about a Chinese publication. Both Chinese Buddhism and Silk Road transmission of Buddhism similarly claim that Qin Shihuang banned Buddhist temples, citing a recent article by Han Wei. This long-discredited interpretation, apparently first proposed by Fujita Toyohachi 藤田丰八, phonetically reads "Buddha" for the auxiliary verb bude 不得 "must not" in the Shiji's 禁不得祠, "It was forbidden to offer sacrifices to the Morning Star" (tr. Watson p. 53 [cribbed through Google Books]). I found this but can't find any English articles that dispute this bude=Buddha interpretation. Do you know of any reliable sources? Keahapana (talk) 01:03, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi again! What could possibly have induced people to believe that Qin Shihuang banned Buddhist temples? It seems so very unlikely there was any significant Buddhist influence in China at the time. Sorry, but all I can find is negative information. Perhaps the most convincing (for me) was that the 7-volume Grand Ricci Chinese to French dictionary, which was written by Jesuits and has every conceivable term relating to religions in it, gives only the usual interpretations for 不得. If they had ever ccome across even one example of it being used to indicate the Buddha they would surely have included it. I also went through old typewritten notes by Fr. Yves Raguin, S. J., on early religions in China, who for 40 years was head of the dictionary project (he died before it was completed), and found nary a mention of 不得. The same goes for several other references I checked. Apologies, though, for not finding any conclusive evidence. Good luck with it all. Cheers, John Hill (talk) 07:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. You're right to expect that the Grand Ricci would enter every known Chinese transcription of "Buddha". I'll post a discussion question on Silk Road transmission of Buddhism and see what happens. Cheers, Keahapana (talk) 02:24, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Clarification

Hi John,

I apologize if some of the edits came across as offensive or intrusive. Most of the time, my edits are just meant to serve as tweaks or minor attempts to make a passage or subject slightly easier to read for everyone. Especially in some historical areas. When certain pages are linked, I like to see similar usage of common dating and era noting. Thus, one some subjects that are heavily linked or have a cross-relationship I sometimes will make the switch as others have mentioned to me (much like myself) they do not like seeing the differences. That is my purpose for some of the changes you noticed apparently.

Much respect, ~L — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonewulf44 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks so much - now I understand why you were doing the edits. Actually, this problem of whether to use the Common Era (BCE and CE) or the Christian Era (BC and AD) - in which the actual dates are the same - has apparently been a rather contentious one on WP. The decision was that either could be used, and that the system first used after an article was created should take preference. The problem with this ruling is that it often takes a lot of time searching through the history of the article to discover which was used first - especially if the first dates were not added for some time after the article was created.
• I must apologise too. I must have seemed quite rude myself, reversing your edits as I did. It is just that there are some editors who seem to feel all Common Era dates should be changed back to the Christian Era equivalents as a matter of course. I have had people doing to articles I have just created and even changing the eras in quotes (which never should be done), so I am a bit sensitive about it.
• My own position is that the Christian Era - even according to most Christian scholars - is not accurate in terms of when Jesus was born anyway, and people of other religions (or no religion) are often uncomfortable using abbreviations which mean "before Christ" (BC) or "in the year of our Lord" (AD). So I prefer to use the more neutral abbreviations, BCE and CE respectively. It seems to me that if we insist on BC and AD, we will have people wanting to use the Indian Saka Era, the Muslim Era, the Buddhist Era, etc., instead of the Christian (or Common) era, which would cause huge confusion as the dates would all be different. But, this is just my personal view. Sorry for any misunderstanding. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 22:36, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.

I wasn't expecting to receive a barnstar for my work on the William Beebe article until I'd finished working on it, which I haven't yet. But thanks: this will definitely help motivate me to do the additional work it'll require to finish it. --Captain Occam (talk) 03:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Portals

Hi, I reverted your addition of the portal over at the dodo article, but for some reason it saved before I could write why in the edit summary, but I wanted to say that the portal is already in the article, though at the bottom, and that putting them so far up messes up the layout, so put them in the see also section or ref section instead. FunkMonk (talk) 06:44, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I wondered what was happening when I was trying to add the portal tag! Thank you very much for your good advice. I will try to follow it. Cheers and best wishes, John Hill (talk) 07:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! FunkMonk (talk) 10:18, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I have replied ...

... on Talk:Ganges. Look forward to your feedback. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:08, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Tectocoris diophthalmus

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Tectocoris diophthalmus, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.ozanimals.com/Insect/Hibiscus-Harlequin-Bug/Tectocoris/diophthalmus.html.

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) 01:59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

I am just in the process of creating the article - please give me a chance to edit it. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 02:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Funny you should say that as I've been feeling less productive of late! Of course I have been creating the evil lairs of the late Osama bin Laden, Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad and Osama bin Laden's house in Khartoum though! Have a great trip my friend, I saw you wildlife articles and photos, great job!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:37, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Dr. John Hill. It is a along time since I got a message from you after your India trip. Yes, Dr. B and me are enjoying writing a DYK a day or even more. It is fun. I hope I can continue as long as I work on some thing (some business) or the other (wikipedia) and keep myself busy and not worry about my age.--Nvvchar. 11:54, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Qur'an article

I was glad to see your recent comments on the Qur'an article. Please enter your vote in the poll that is being conducted for a return to the long-standing spelling. Best wishes, Abdullajh (talk) 04:22, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

How does it look?

I think I’m finished making major changes to the William Beebe article at this point. I may still clean up the references some more, and I’m also going to try to get it up to GA status eventually, but at this point I’d appreciate you letting me know if you have any suggestions about it in terms of overall content. --Captain Occam (talk) 03:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits to the Beebe article broke some of the references. When you’re using the same citation more than once, you have to make sure you refer to the citation by the same name wherever you cite it; otherwise it generates an error. I’ve fixed that problem now, but please try to be careful about it in the future.

If you’re looking for anything else you can do to improve this article, one other thing that Bgwhite is helping me with is converting the citations to use the harvnb template. He’s already done this for the Gould, Cullen and Berra books, but it still needs to be done for Welker’s, Matsen’s and Rudder’s. You can look at the format of the citations where he’s done this already to get an idea of what it should be for the others. Are you interested in helping with that? --Captain Occam (talk) 20:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC)~

Sorry about broken references and I apologise for any inconvenience. Also, unfortunately, I won't be able to help with the template - I am only here in Vancouver, Canada for another few days (to celebrate my mother's 97th) - so I will be really busy with family matters. Then, next Monday we leave for 5 weeks travel in China. I do hope it goes well and smoothly, though. I am worried others may find the article a bit long but, other than this, I think the article is ready to submit for consideration for GA status and I send you all best wishes for that. I have had great fun showing the article to some of my family here who had met Beebe and they were all thrilled to see it. Thanks again for the hard work you have put into it - it is much appreciated. John Hill (talk) 01:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Why are you archiving my Talk page - and why doesn't the archive you have created show up on it?

I just noticed that User:MiszaBot III has archived material from my Talk page twice and there is no record left on my Talk page to show where the correspondence has been placed. Would you please explain to me why this has been done and how people can access these archives? Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 03:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Apparently you did it, back in April. The bot has been moving sections to /Archive 1. To maintain consistency with your other archive pages, you could move that to /Archive 7, change the bot accordingly (i.e. set |counter = 7), and add the link to your archive box.

—WWoods (talk) 07:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much for explaining what happened with my archives. I must be getting really forgetful in my old age! I have no memory of doing this and, apparently, I made a mess of it. :( Unfortunately, I can't deal with it all right away as I leave for China this morning - will get to it as soon as I can. I really appreciate your help and patience. Best wishes, John Hill (talk) 14:51, 6 June 2011 (UTC)