User talk:Lucian Sunday

Welcome

Hello Lucian Sunday, and welcome to Wikipedia! We're really glad you've chosen to sign up for an account; it offers numerous benefits in case you weren't already aware of them.

Thankyou for your contributions if you've been editing before you got this message. If you haven't, don't worry: there are numerous ways you can contribute to Wikipedia if you're not sure where to start yet. Either way, we hope you'll like the place and decide to stay. We all remember what it's like to be new, so don't let others scare you off.

Useful links

Here's some useful links that will help you get started.

•   Wikipedia:How to edit a page - it's a lot easier than you might think.

•   Tutorial - a collection of pages explaining the most important things for contributing to Wikipedia.

•   Sandbox - the best place for trying things out. If previous edits you made to articles have been reverted because they were experimental or unconstructive, this is the place to make test edits.

•   Wikipedia:Where to ask a question - Wikipedia has numerous places for you to put your questions and comments forward.

•   Wikipedia:Five pillars - Wikipedia's official policies and guidelines are summarized here.

•   Wikipedia:Manual of Style - our style guide outlines our standards for ensuring that we present information in a consistent manner that promotes cohesion and professionalism.

Contributing

With these references at hand, we hope you find it easier to contribute to Wikipedia. Here's a brief synopsis of some ways you can:

• We obviously wouldn't have an encyclopedia without articles. This page shows how you can help them grow.

• Removing vandalism and keeping the integrity of articles intact is a great way of contributing. More information on how to do so can be found here.

• Fixing typos, correcting poor grammar and repairing broken links are just some examples of useful, behind the scenes contributions. Even just making things look nice makes using Wikipedia more pleasant for everybody.

• If you like working with images, you might be interested in the Graphic Lab. Similarly, this page shows you how to work with images in Wikipedia articles.

• This page lists the many types of tasks you can do to maintain Wikipedia.

• There are numerous WikiProjects that aim to provide coordination and collaboration on particular subjects. From this list, you can join a project and contribute within an area that interests you.

Of course, there are many ways of contributing, but I hope that this message is helpful to you, and that you'll enjoy editing Wikipedia and continue to do so. You can respond to this message by clicking here if you have a comment or need help - don't forget to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), or you can place {{helpme}} on your talk page and write your query there. Again, welcome to Wikipedia! WilliamH (talk) 19:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• No problem, if you have any questions by all means put them to me. WilliamH (talk) 20:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Molyneux

If you need help with William Molyneux, I have many real sources (i.e, non-encyclopedias) to fill in details. Just drop me a line if you find yourself stuck. Ottava Rima (talk) 12:59, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I saw your comment on Bardcom's talk page. I discovered with great pleasure the WP article on William Molyneux. I found this Jstor Royal Society biographical sketch [1]. The sketch in particular mentions an article published in the Philisophical Transactions of the Royal Society which compares the weather in Dublin and Oxford. I don't know what the article says, but it might help in resolving the impasse on Thames frost fairs. There is a slight problem about using the term United Kingdom because it only came into existence in 1707; and Britain is a disambiguation page. I hope this helps. I have no views either way, but it is hard to find a geographical term which is not a disambiguation page. I'll try to dig out the reference, but, if it's between 1683 and 1686 as the article indicates, it might not be that easy. Cheers, Mathsci (talk) 10:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

All of Phl. Trans. have been digitized on jstor, but it seems the article on the weather was just an apparently unrecorded paper read to the Royal Society. I did find an interesting article from 1684 by John Evelyn where he details the plants and trees lost as a result of the severe winter in England and "countries to the South". Mathsci (talk) 10:46, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

A little more investigation showed that Molyneux for 2 years or so from 1683-1685 sent his "weather diary" to William Musgrave, FRS, of New College, Oxford. He was using a grid designed in England and apparently one example of such a page is in the 3rd volume of Robert Gunther's "Early science in Oxford". Perhaps these diaries are kept in an archive of the college or a History of Science Museum in Oxford. Mathsci (talk) 14:56, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Here is Plot's plot on jstor [2], a giant foldout from Vol 15 of Phil Trans (1685). The rest of the article contains the daily weather reports for each month of 1684. I now know why I live in the South of France. :-) Mathsci (talk) 13:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Arthritis

Concerning your addition of William Musgrave to the "History" section in arthritis, could you clarify Musgrave's contribution to the understanding of arthritis? Just because he wrote a book about it doesn't mean it is notable... There is plenty of scope for more talk about Garrod, Landré-Beauvais, etc. JFW | T@lk 14:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. One of the problems of arthritis is that it deals with a number of conditions that all cause inflammation (and often destruction) of the joints. It is therefore very hard to write a history of all of those at the same time. If Musgrave was notable for identifying Devon colic then surely his opinions on arthritis, even if now considered wrong, will have had some weight at the time. It would be immensely helpful to have a secondary source confirming this, but your contribution is appreciated.

Have you a specific interest in medical history? I am strictly an amateur but always try to equip my articles with decent history sections, insofar as they are sourceable. JFW | T@lk 15:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Global Warming

Answered (and apologised) on my talk page. --BozMo talk 13:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The Three-revert rule and the Shakespeare authorship question

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Shakespeare authorship question. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.

I'll comment on the talk page. AndyJones (talk) 07:00, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:AE

Hi, can you please stop clogging up the AE page with your complaints about a completely uninvolved administrator. My comment about "No one likes to issues blocks and bans" were referring to the regular admins on the Troubles articles, not any random admin that you happen to have an issue with. If you believe someone is acting problematically, the correct venue is WP:RFC. Thanks, Black Kite 14:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

lol Lucian Sunday (talk) 14:22, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks (on Pytheas)

I approve of the map. I was looking for pics but couldn't settle on any. I'm on this because people seemed to be having trouble with the scholarship involved and kept making generalities taken from generalities etc until it seemed anyone could say anything about Pytheas with equal certitide and some were beginning to portray him as mythological. I didn't expect to find this much. I'm finishing up on Britain and then will go on to Thule and the Baltic. But now that I've gotten into Strabo and the name of the British I see there are about 15 more articles still in crude shape. Anyway, when I've gotten to the point where Pytheas appears as a definitive person I will stop. The article will be longer, say 50 KB, but everyone seems interested in Pytheas and nothing it seems can be easily said. He is however in a good many articles. Thank you for your positive reaction, which encourages me to finish up the minimum. If you see any more pics we could probably use them. Best wishes.Dave (talk) 01:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I took a good look at this source - unfortunately you could give us only one page so we don't really know what the author's theory was. In any case, all this is only theory. We don't know know if Ptolemy based his map on Pytheas; it is only a theory. Morover, Ptolemy is distorted in a lot of places that can have nothing to do with Pytheas, so accounting for the distortion in this way is one theory among many. This is one of the issues I want to present in a plodding, careful way, but I have not got to it yet. I did get to the perimeter or coastline theory. The basic problem is to account for Strabo's dissatisfaction. We KNOW Pytheas could take a precise latitude. Why then does Strabo give us figures that are wildly off? I was going to get to that below and still will. Meanwhile the only objection I have to your insertion is that you present it as fact and not theory. So I believe I will soften your language slightly for now until I can get to this (after the Baltic). It is a legitimate concern and one I hope address more clearly. Thanks.Dave (talk) 10:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Pseudunio auricularia/ Spengler's freshwater mussel

{{help}} Help needed to correct merge templates. Lucian Sunday (talk) 20:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

 Done. Dendodge|Talk^Contribs 20:15, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

...for flexing your mussels. Lucian Sunday (talk) 21:14, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Player of the month

Hi, when you update footballers' articles with them having won Premier League Player of the Month, please would you also add a source for them having done so. thanks, Struway2 (talk) 22:26, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

The relevant premier league site page is currently under construction. I intend to add the sources then. As you know Premier League Player of the Month is unsourced and untagged. A more consistent approcah would be to tag that site if you feel there is a problem migrating the information

I have now tagged that list as unreferenced, thank you for suggesting that. Was unaware of its existence until checking it in vain for a source for the addition you made to Marcus Bent, who is on my watchlist. Are there no other sources listing this award? if not, the media certainly report it at the time. Though for the older awards, where media archives may no longer be available, perhaps it would be better waiting for the relevant page on the Premier League site to be constructed, rather than adding unsourced material to player articles. There's generally enough unsourced stuff on them as it is. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:09, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I saw your comment about the news on the Wikipedia front page. That is actually a very good point you make. It definitely weakens any argument that Wikipedia is not a news service. --Jameboy (talk) 01:18, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

3RR

Please see this complaint at WP:AN3 and consider undoing your last revert. You have made four reverts on Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not in 24 hours, which violates WP:3RR. If you don't self-revert, it's possible you will be blocked. If you continue to make other edits while not undoing your revert, people will assume that you have refused and admins may take any appropriate action. EdJohnston (talk) 15:27, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

WP:NOTMEMORIAL

Hi,

I've reverted the change you made to this redirect. It makes very little sense to me why a redirect which states that WP is not a memorial would link to a page which explicitly states "this page is a memorial". What was the rationale for this? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 07:37, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

An Bonnán Buí

{{help}} I note language templates such as Here are often added to pages. Could someone explain what these are - Is there a WP: page that explains it? Do they improve English Wiki or the relevent Wiki in that Language? Lucian Sunday (talk) 15:49, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Those are Interlanguage links, which link articles about the same topic on multiple language Wikipedias. Stwalkerster [ talk ] 16:02, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

New requested move at Flag of Ireland

You are receiving this message as you took part is a past move request at Flag of Ireland . This message is to inform you that their a new move has been requested GnevinAWB (talk) 23:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

A page you moved

It's pretty much always been exactly what it says on the tin, hasn't it? Probably bears some research... I'll try and get into it when I have some time. Angmering (talk) 18:31, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I have moved it back to where it was. Cheers! Angmering (talk) 18:58, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Definition of Anti-Masonry

The definition that I reverted to in the Freemasonry article is accurate to my copy of the OED.

Perhaps the difference is that you are using the definition of "Anti-Mason" (a person) while I am using the definition of "Anti-Masonry" (a concept). I reverted because the article, is discussing the entire concept of Anti-Masorny, and is not limited to the individuals who might be Anti-Masons. Blueboar (talk) 15:53, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Paul Ferris.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Paul Ferris.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Not The Flesh (talk) 23:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Deceased Wikipedians

This was very well said. Nicely done. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 18:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Dermatology | Contact dermatitis

Do you have an interest in dermatology and/or contact dermatitis? If so, I could always use more help ;) kilbad (talk) 16:30, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Hugh_Kindersley_2nd_Baron_Kindersley.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Hugh_Kindersley_2nd_Baron_Kindersley.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:John Freeman Politician.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:John Freeman Politician.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Rakt

What relevence has the results of a non notable club got to do with an article about a Dutch village. BigDunc^Talk 17:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

To my mind the relevance is that a team so apallingly, apallingly bad, (they really are apallingly bad- but you only know that if you can see the table) claim to have adopted skirts for footballing reasons. Unfortunatelky there are no references at present to dispell their claims. The provision of information, ie the table, allows the reader to make up there own mind. Lucian Sunday (talk) 17:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC)