User talk:Nicknack009

Archives and sub-pages

• Talk before December 2005 archived
• Talk from December 2005 to February 2007
• Talk from February to December 2007
• Talk from 2008
• Talk from 2009

Hey!

Good to see you back, such as it is. Your contributions have been sorely missed.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:21, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello Nick! The reason I included a list of notable Ancient Romans is because I wanted to give the reader a list of Romans who significantly changed Roman history. The Romans I have added are great Generals, lawmakers and emperors. The reader when studying these individuals will have a full grasp of the entire history of Rome. I am aware of the list of ancient Romans, but most are insignificant to the casual reader and of little value to the professional historian. Per82 (talk) 13:24, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Mabinogion

nice work Decora (talk) 14:53, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Hind 2007

If you enable e-mail in your preferences , I'd be glad to send you a temporary link for access. I can't take the time to look at this myself, though Haploidavey seems not to have ruled it out. Wareh (talk) 22:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

A queue! - it makes me feel quite at home. Nicknack, please let me know (here would be fine) if you need more than the single access - or even, once I've read the Hind article, a second opinion on the particulars. Haploidavey (talk) 22:44, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I have the article saved, and will read it at my leisure. As for now, it's late, and I'm going to bed. --Nicknack009 (talk) 22:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I've summarised Hind's argument. Still don't think it makes political sense - it would be like the US, after the first Gulf War, appointing an Iraqi dignitary as the new ruler of Kuwait. (I also think the best solution for the westward crossing is that the main invasion force sailed from the Rhine, one of the four departure points for Britain mentioned by Strabo and the easiest route for the four legions from their previous stations to the coast, not that they landed at Chichester.) --Nicknack009 (talk) 09:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Grant Morrison photo

Hi. Your opinion on what would be the best photo for the Infobox in the Grant Morrison article is requested here. If you could take the time to participate, it would be greatly appreciated, but if you cannot, then disregard; you don't have to leave a note on my talk page either way. Nightscream (talk) 01:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Good to see you! and Irish language stuff

At Badb#Representations_in_legends I put in the OI of "The Morrígan's Prophecy" from CELT: Cath Maige Tuired: The Second Battle of Mag Tuired. The English translation has been shared around for years, with a variety of people tweaking it. I think it's pretty straightforward, but would appreciate someone with more Irish to check it. What had been there previously was a modern English version that, while creative and poetic, had been translated from a Modern Irish variation, and hence diverged pretty significantly from the original Irish. Stay in touch, K? Go raibh maith agat, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Julius Caesar Edit

Hi. I recently edited the Julius Caesar article to remove a sentence that I thought was misleading, but you undid the edit. I had created a section in the Julius Caesar talk page about why I think that sentence is incorrect. Could you please just post a reply in that section to explain why you think the sentence should remain?

Thanks, IBrow1000 (talk) 11:46, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Conn Cetcathach

Hi, you expressed a concern over my edit which you reverted so I've amended slightly. The problem is that 'historical tradition' a phrase that many would see as an oxymoron. asnac (talk) 18:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

John Constantine

Forgot to put the citations for factual accuracy, made it and hope this'll help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.212.120.29 (talk) 00:29, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

liberti and libertini

For a brief explanation, see Roman Empire#Freedmen. You seem to be unaware of how these terms were actually used in Latin authors, and that in fact they tend to not be distinguished once we get deeper in the Imperial era. Please check the sources cited there, but a dozen others could easily be cited. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:44, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

I should also note that so basic a source as the Oxford Latin Dictionary defines libertinus as "a member of the class of freedmen, a freedman (w. ref. only to social and leg. status)" and libertus as "a freedman (w. ref. to the manumitter or patron)." As is pointed out in Mouritsen and elsewhere, however, these distinctions are often hard to discern in the actual usage of Latin texts. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:52, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Brigantes

I see you have been struggling to try to communicate with Rheton. You may or may not know that he/she has reported you to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Naturally, I have declined the report, as the suggestion that your edits are "vandalism" is absurd. However, you should be careful about edit warring: it would be a pity if you were blocked for your efforts. As you probably know, the standard edit warring warning template says "Do not edit war even if you believe you are right." Please do feel welcome to contact me if the disruptive editing continues, and I will take administrative action if it becomes necessary. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Celts

I'm not sure what was wrong with the edits you reverted at [1]. Obviously they weren't minor, & I think there was a slight grammar problem, but what else? Dougweller (talk) 06:08, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I've reverted. For some reason I thought they were a removal of content rather than an addition. Sorry. --Nicknack009 (talk) 10:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Been there, done that. No problem. Dougweller (talk) 10:59, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Julius Caesar

Don't know how much you want to work on that article, but in regard to this edit, I also don't think we need the gallery currently at Julius Caesar#Depictions, since that is what Cultural depictions of Julius Caesar is for, and the article is already illustrated with too many busts. However, I do think we need some kind of summary section there covering legends/legacy/"depictions". Cynwolfe (talk) 16:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Boudica

Hi, there is discussion concerning the spelling of Boudica's name, during which a comment of yours from 2006 has been referenced. If you have any additional information about the issue, your input would be appreciated. Paul B (talk) 16:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Template

What's the problem with the new template structure if the content is unchanged? You are acting as if it is your own property.--95.233.79.61 (talk) 15:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

The content is not unchanged. Everything is now framed in religious terms, not mythological ones. --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Amergin Glúingel

Ran into this name in a new edit to Druid. I'm struggling with it. Can't find him mentioned here[2] under that name, but she does say:

Amairgin (Amargcn, Amhairghin, Amairgin, Amairgein, Amorgin) Irish hero. This name, which means "wontlrously born" or "song-con- ception" is borne by two legendary poets: • Amairgin, son of Mil and the first great poet of Ireland, was reputed to have lived in the sixth century c.e. When the tuatha de danann, who then had control of Ireland, blew up a magical storm to keep the invading milesians from landing, Amairgin's magical words calmed the storm and allowed his peo- ple to land, with Amairgin himself becoming the first of his race to set foot on Irish soil. As he did so, he recited his most famous poem, the "Song of Amairgin," in which he describes himself shape-shifting into a salmon, a sunbeam, a flower, a spear; similar poems...

No Gluingel here, and no Druid (and later than the classical Druids).

Brief mention in Llewellyn's Complete Book of Names. And of course[3] but that doesn't say he was a Druid or even mention Druids. The article is pretty vague about where he is mentioned. Where is he called a Druid in Irish mythology? Dougweller (talk) 11:07, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

He has the epithet Gluingel in Lebor Gabála (for example here, page 33 paragraph 387). I can't turn up any reference to him as a druid - I must have copied that over when the article Amergin was converted into a disambiguation page - although his opponents are called druids. The reference to Amergin supposedly living in the 6th century CE is just wrong - the invasion of the Milesians was supposed to have taken place in the deep pre-Christian past. Having said that, druids are not uncommon in medieval Irish literature, down to St Patrick's time. --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:27, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen that Gluingel, but I'm not convinced we should use that as the title as his common name. I've removed the claims he was a Druid. Dougweller (talk) 18:04, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Conquered

There was Celt in al-Andalus and Ottomans went as far as Vienna thus covered some Celtic regions.. Furthermore, Judaism was quite prominent in some parts. Pass a Method talk 08:18, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

None of those regions had been Celtic since the Roman conquest, and none of them contributed to the Mabinigion. Go away. --Nicknack009 (talk) 08:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Tony Harding

And thanks for adding Lefty!

Sadtoseeitsmorning 14 February 2014.  —Preceding undated comment added 17:23, 14 February 2014 (UTC) 

Not a problem :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Nicknack. Thanks for your tweaking of the page. I have all the info but I'm not so hot on the ways of Wiki! Tony was my father so I have access to loads of his old comics such as Action, Bullet, ROTR, Victor Scoop etc... I'd like to upload an example of his comic artwork to the wiki page, maybe something from Look Out For Lefty? Would appreciate your help with this. Also I have another obituary from the Guernsey Press (which I have referenced). Cheers! Antony. Sadtoseeitsmorning 13 February 2014.

High King of Ireland

The thing is, it doesn't matter who is right here. Please read WP:3RR - you are in breach of this and need to step away for a short while or you will probably end up blocked as your reverts aren't covered by the exemptions. This isn't the way to deal with problems like this. You really don't want a block on your record. Dougweller (talk) 12:13, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Looks like you are getting some helpful advice. I see you misunderstood 3RR, no problem. Dougweller (talk) 21:00, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

List of druids and neo-druids

Could you take a look at this article and the talk page? Some of the articles linked may have problems also, I already spotted one. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 14:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Erasmus Augustus Worthington

Thanks for your detective work. As a final nail in the article's coffin, I have used Tineye to locate the photograph here - it is one John Tregerthen Short. I have nominated the page at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erasmus Augustus Worthington. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

August 2014 - Annals of Ulster question

Nicknack009

I received your note about the Annals of Ulster changes. Okay, let me explain my edit that you changed back here, so we can discuss my concern in this forum. Apologies on my part if I saw the wrong link. I've been concerned that some of the entries involving Ulster-related articles are being edited to rewrite a historical narrative to suit narrow-minded political agendas. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not doing that.

My concern was that the link I followed didn't seem to make sense. Can you please provide me the link you intended to use, or are you using, in a reply below perhaps, so I can just follow it to see? I have looked on the web and I have tried to follow your link and I cannot find anywhere that validates the name of the Annals being what you are showing. Annala Uladh was the only name I had previously known about. If you could provide that, it would be appreciated. Otherwise, I have to ask that we omit the name until we have some kind of scholastic verification that the annals were ever known by that name. I cannot find the Four Master's reference to the annals as being referenced to a progenitor chieftain, or to any single individual, but always saw them referenced as the Annala Uladh. Thank you for your consideration of this request. I look forward to seeing the link. Maybe the link Wikipedia provided was not the one you intended. Thanks again.

Oghmatist (talk) 15:42, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Have replied on your own talk page. Basically, you're not editing the article you think you are. --Nicknack009 (talk) 17:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Read your reply. Thank you. Will you consider using this link to further educate the researcher that wants to validate the name history of this Cycle? Your current link leads to a search page that is not immediately user-friendly. Here is the considered link:

http://www.ainm.ie/Tag.aspx?Type=opus&SubType=book&Valyoo=An%20R%C3%BAra%C3%ADocht

As you will see, this link provides an author, date, and title that allows the researcher to do further reading. Thank you for the talk. Oghmatist (talk) 20:00, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Re. The Hill of Tara

Hi I was just wondering why you reverted my addition to the page The Hill of Tara. I though my edit was useful and I had cited an article on the subject. I dont mean to question you judgement but I would just like to know where I went wrong. ~~dickscawed — Preceding undated comment added 00:09, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

It's a trivial incident involving non-notable people. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:39, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

While I acknowledge it may be obscure I wouldn't go as far as calling it trivial. The event was part was part of The Gathering which was in itself an event of international significance. The fact that the hill of Tara was chosen also makes the event relevant as it reflects how the hill has developed into a modern tourist attraction on account of it's historic roots. Whether the people involved are non-notable is a different matter. ~~dickscawed

I called it trivial because it is. Tara is a monument of historic significance. Occasional tourism publicity stunts are insignificant and don't belong in an encyclopedia. --Nicknack009 (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Conor / Conchobar

Hello, I noticed you reverted this merge. These names are different spellings of the same thing. On the article Donald for instance, Domhnall and Donal (as well as other spellings) redirect there, for a centralised discussion on the name. What would be the purpose of having several articles on the same name when they can be brought together efficiently? Claíomh Solais (talk) 10:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I disagree. They are distinct names, and there is no overlap between them, so the two articles refer to distinct sets of people. Modern people with the name Conor are not called Conchobar, and medieval people with the name Conchobar are not called Conor, so a reader looking up "Conchobar" is not looking for people called Conor, and vice versa. --Nicknack009 (talk) 10:36, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

How is there no overlap between them when Conor is just an Anglicisation of Conchobar? Otherwise, "Conor" would just be jibberish word, without it's Irish context of "lover of hounds". I suppose you could make an argument that Connor is the most commonly searched in English so that might be a better centralised location, as the article on Donald is for example, which I would be open to. Look at articles like John (given name) or Paul (name) for example which gives an overview of the name and then discusses within it derivatives in other languages. Claíomh Solais (talk) 10:47, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

There is no overlap because they are used in different periods and in different languages. The medieval Irish kings listed under Conchobar are never referred to as Conor. The modern people listed under Conor are never referred to as Conchobar. Conor is not "just" an Anglicisation of Conchobar, it's now an English name in its own right. There are lots of names like that, and there is no "one size fits all" rule for how Wikipedia is to treat them. Different forms of the same name are not interchangeable. See, for example, William and Wilhelm for an example of two forms of the same name that have separate articles. Equally, Juan and Seán are eqivalent to John, but have separate articles. In fact, there is a disambiguation page for alternate forms for the name John, with links to dozens of separate articles. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:06, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Legendary characters

I searched the WPBIO archives for 'legendary' and read the very few relevant hits --only four relevant, in contrast to the sense in which Charles Darwin is a legendary scientist.

Last October you notified ... and concluded, "I shall start removing legendary characters from the project." Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Archive 49#Characters from Irish myth and legend.

Did you complete that? --P64 (talk) 22:55, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

P64 (talk · contribs), that was a while ago. I think I completed it with the Irish characters, but I don't think I did anything with characters from other cultures. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Renaming the Derry article

Hi Nick, are you able to respond to my question [4]. Please help me out here. I'm trying to engage on this in a sensible manner so sarcastic comments aren't helpful [5]. TY. Dubs boy (talk) 15:22, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Not being sarcastic. You asked me what policy was being followed. I linked you to that policy. As I explained to you before, the current naming is an agreed compromise. It's something a broad consensus can live with. But you do not appear interested in that - you want to win. All that would achieve would be to reopen a very tedious argument. Now, I have made my position on this issue clear more than once, please do not keep asking. --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:51, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Druid

Thanks. Reported this to RPP. Doug Weller (talk) 06:26, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Disputed

Whilst the section you moved the information too I feel is probably better for it and so won't argue about that, may I ask why you felt that the factual accuracy of the section was disputed? Everything that needed cited was cited and is in the sources attributed. The pre-existing literature section however does have issues that need addressed yet isn't tagged, but I'll get that to bit eventually. Work in progress ad all that. Mabuska ^(talk) 10:28, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

I just seen that you opened a talk page discussion of it at the article page. Mabuska ^(talk) 10:30, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nath Í mac Fiachrach, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A. M. Sullivan. 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) 10:46, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

To scholars...

I see only one source that state that he was real. There are many other scholarly sources doubt this. Due weight must be given and better detail given over the controversy over the issue. Then again the article ignores the reality that many scholars doubt the "fact" that all of Nialls sons are so. Mabuska ^(talk) 19:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Opened up discussion on the talk page. Mabuska ^(talk) 19:38, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting me

Morning Nicknack009, Thanks for reverting my edit on Category:Medieval Irish poets - do not know what I was thinking Icarusgeek (talk) 09:05, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Lugaid Mac Con Roi

Hi, I see you've made a load of edits on the page for Lugaid Mac Con Roi...I'm new to Wikipedia so I'm not entirely sure if you added this particular piece of information or not, but it made me curious... "He took Lugaid's head and set it on a stone, but his blood melted the stone and the head sank right through it." I've never seen that anywhere but on this Wiki page, and was wondering where you read it (if you were the one to actually add it) Thanks! Nightpassing (talk) 19:11, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't remember if I added that or not, but it's in The Death of Cú Chulainn in the Book of Leinster. I have the edition/translation by Bettina Kimpton in the Maynooth Medieval Irish Texts series, published by the School of Celtic Studies, National University of Ireland, Maynooth, in 2009. It's on page 46. --Nicknack009 (talk) 19:49, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try that edition! Nightpassing (talk) 20:19, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Celtchar

Your revert to poor english, is reverted. WurmWoode^T 13:56, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Welsh kings

thanks for the information re: bio tags. these were good faith edits. sorry for the extra work.--FeanorStar7 10:46, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of The Drama of the Lost Disciples for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Drama of the Lost Disciples 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/The Drama of the Lost Disciples (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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Comment removal

Hello. I thought you might like to know that somebody is trying to delete your comments - and mine too - on the Cunobeline talk page. I have tried to engage with the editor, but he has now deleted these comments three times. I have reverted twice and will do so again if necessary. As far as I can see, an editor is not allowed to remove comments from a talk page in most circumstances. WallHeath (talk) 19:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Non-minor revert

Hi Nick,

I saw this revert to virtue signalling. I think it was probably right to undo the IPs edit but I wouldn't have marked it as minor and I would have given an explanation. The IP edit appears to be good-faith and the IP has given an explanation.

The easiest way to achieve the above is to use 'undo' instead of 'revert'.

Yaris678 (talk) 07:43, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Notices

Just a heads up, I neither need nor want deletion or merge notices, especially nor for anything less than an AFD. I keep track of articles I make so there's really no need to waste time informing me about it. I want my talkpage to be about actually discussing things, not cluttered up with notices about stuff.★Trekker (talk) 09:34, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Don't want everyone time

It's completely unneeded.★Trekker (talk) 11:47, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Apparently I can't request the deletion of an article I made because it has an AD on it, why???? That doesn't make any sense. It will just take more time and effort than needed now.★Trekker (talk) 11:53, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

In the length of time it took for me to compose a reply, the article was deleted. No need for any fuss - the system works. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:57, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Deletion discussions usually takes days as far as I've seen. If anything it seems like it got deleted faster because I made a fuss, either way, I still don't get why they didn't just let me delete it like I have done other things in the past.★Trekker (talk) 12:13, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Apology

Hi, I just want apologies about how I acted recently. I know I kinda freaked out and got really confrontative, that was very childish and immature of me. I know I have some issues sometimes with my anger but that really is no excuse. I hope I did not cause any major disruption in your regular wikipedia editing enjoyment and work. Looking back now just a few days afterwards I feel pretty embarrassed by some of my comments. I know very well that you (just like me and any other decent editor) just want to hold the site to a good standard and follow guidelines (for example about what should be included and what not), I did not follow guidelines when I became uncivil and I hope you can forgive me for that. I'm trying to get better, but at times I fail, sometimes pretty hard. I'm sorry.★Trekker (talk) 15:30, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

No worries. I know it's hard not to take things personally sometimes. --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Your Judge Dredd PRODS

I thought they were good nominations. Please ping me if you decide to take them to AfD. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:49, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Cheers. Coverage of Judge Dredd-related stuff here on Wikipedia is horribly bloated with stuff that clearly falls short of the notability requirements, and so much of it is really badly written "in-universe" fancruft. I really only scratched the surface. I may take it to AfD, but I'm not optimistic. Even when you do go to AfD no admins seem prepared to apply Wikipedia policy. They're only interested in "consensus", so the fancrufters are easily able to talk it out. When I have a bit more time to devote to it, we'll see. --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Nicknack009. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

"Zealotry"

Being an "AD/BC zealot" is one thing, being a "TA zealot" quite another.

I don't know who you think you are but I suggest you should start living in the real world and show other people some respect. They might then show you some. VZ (talk) 22:59, 29 December 2017 (UTC)