User talk:Llywrch

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11

---

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

• • Your comment replying to me was well-said!--Milowent (talk) 05:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Possible typo

On Shinasha, you wrote "all the region to the North of the Blue Nile was once inhabited by a white or yellow race and that the blacks, who have penetrated it, did so at the time they were gleeing their country form the Galla invasions?". Is this a typo? Particularly the words "gleeing" and "form" and the question mark at the end. —Soap— 18:52, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Flagged revisions and BLPs

Hi, as I mentioned in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people#Debate, whoever told you flagged revisions is forgotten about has no idea what they're talking about considering this is currently one of the WMF's most important projects and has been discussed in the media and other places like wikimania. Also whoever told you flagged revisions was some wonder pill for any and all BLP problems clearly had no idea what they're talking about. I suggest you ignore such people and perhaps even take it up with them for spreading misinformation. Definitely it would help un a number of ways, but it's not a wonder solution, and the vast majority of people concerned about BLPs I've dealt with know that and have made it clear from the get go. Nil Einne (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)

The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Abuse_of_Page_Protection_tools

I have spelled out exactly what happened. Shoemaker's Holiday ^talk 20:53, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Understood. I notified you only because the thread's somewhat old. I understood your response, but it wasn't really feeling unappreciated as being harassed by someone who I was pretty much told was untouchable. Throw me an e-mail. We can talk there. Shoemaker's Holiday ^talk 21:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Mirab Shewa

Hi Llywrch. I noticed your interest in all things Ethiopian, and particularly your note at Mirab Shewa Zone about the splitting of the page. I've added further details to the Talk page as I cannot access the Central Statistical Agency of Ethiopia's website to confirm the details for the original source. Incidentally, it appears that Adama is a Special Zone, separate from Mirab Shewa, presumably because it was, for a short time, the capital of the Oromiya region. Skinsmoke (talk) 14:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

The CSA website can be difficult to access at times -- as can every URL in the .et subdomain. (I don't know if it's due to network problems, or that they have insufficient bandwidth to handle the demand on their servers. But the website is very useful, unlike a lot of other Ethiopian websites.) That's why I downloaded a copy of the preliminary report of the 2007 Ethiopian Census, & I'd be happy to email you a copy if you have your "e-mail this user" link enabled. (Or email me & I'll respond with a copy.) -- llywrch (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Please! Good of you to offer. Link is now enabled. Access to the site doesn't appear to be a problem at the moment, but downloading anything is impossible. I suspect its a bandwidth problem in Addis Ababa. Skinsmoke (talk) 01:39, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Discussion of Kmweber's editing restriction

Since you commented in the sub-thread WP:ANI#Specific question growing out of User:Kmweber's recent edits to an AfD page and his subsequent block and unblock, i wish to draw your attention to WP:ANI#Proposed modification of restriction of Kmweber where I have proposed that his restriction be modified as discussed the the "specific question" sub thread. Your views would be welcome. DES ^(talk) 15:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Lone oak.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lone oak.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 13:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:03, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Spam

One wonders what one has to have done to be spammed 100kb of deletion warnings like this. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 11:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

A present for you. Template:Location map Ethiopia relief. See Abul Kasim (mountain). Can you copy the infobox and map and update the 26 other mountain articles? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 23:41, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Mount Paras RfC

Hello Admin Llywrch,

Me and Supreme Deliciousness believe that some editor are not edit article in good faith and purposely create disrupt to article and many other. It hard negotiate with editor who not interest in improve article but only want make bias to own opinion. This disruptive editing by select few editor edit put halt to move forward with this article and with RfC name change at Mount Yosifon. Be there some where on Wikipedia where other Admin can review contribution of disruptive editor to see if they agree with this concern? It very hard to bring truth to article when other editor to article not agree work with information present. Sorry for bad english. Ani medjool (talk) 20:50, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Isaaq etc.

FYI and FWIW, I've opened a discussion at WP:CNOTICE#Somali clan listings. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 21:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Somali clans, that works for me, thanks! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:57, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Sticky prods

Hi Llywrch'! You participated earlier in the sticky prod workshop. The sticky prods are now in use, but there are still a few points of contention.
There are now a few proposals on the table to conclude the process. I encourage your input, whatever it might be. Thanks. --Maurreen (talk) 06:38, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)

The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Bullying and insulting, but worst of all ignorant

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Your comment here hardly deserves further attention, except insofar as it reveals your own ignorance. To learn something of the character V, I suggest that you take the time to read Ellen Crowell's paper published in the winter 2008/2009 issue of Neo-Victorian studies. It's available as a pdf to download if you have the wit to find it, or the honesty to look for it. Malleus Fatuorum 13:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

A warning is not bullying; although your responses are clearly bullying. ("wit to find it, or the honesty to look for it" is something an advocate for a fringe belief facing a permanent ban from Wikipedia might write.) And if my response "hardly deserves further attention", why have you made three separate responses to it? Lastly, if this essay is so important to your crusade for the Truth(TM), why did you not mention it on the relevant talk page? -- llywrch (talk) 16:08, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

It is clearly you who is on a crusade, not me. I am trying to educate you, not complaining about your repeated abuse and bullying. There's clearly no point in complaining about that. Malleus Fatuorum 16:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, I found the following quotation on p. 26 of the article you pointed me to. Most enlightening:

Why don’t we portray him as a resurrected Guy Fawkes, complete with one of those papier-mâché masks, in a cape and a conical hat? He’d look really bizarre and it would give Guy Fawkes the image he’s deserved all these years. We shouldn’t burn the chap every Nov. 5th but celebrate his attempt to blow up Parliament!

— David Lloyd, Painted Smile, p. 272

And even if Crowell is correct about the allusions to Wilde in this article (she admits elsewhere that it is a hypothesis), they do not rule out the now-admitted use of Guy Fawkes in this work. This is not an either/or situation, but one of synthesis in the work itself: the character's own actions can be said to have been influenced by Guy Fawkes, while at the same time the authors can be said to have made allusions to Oscar Wilde in their work. The horse is dead; time to move on. -- llywrch (talk) 16:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Did you read any of the other pages? Malleus Fatuorum 17:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)

The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Location maps

I've created maps for Tigray and Afar, see Mek'ele and Semera. This is the best I can manage. I'll do maps for all of the other regions if you want them. Its up to you if you want to keep both or remove the Ethiopia map, after all the regional maps have locators in the corner so people know where in Ethiopia it is. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 09:47, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Don't overwhelm me with your enthusiasm... Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 21:15, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Typo

[1]. Three 'p's in 'apppointed'? Not like you at all! Philip Trueman (talk) 16:30, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:ANI [2]

There you go. SGGH ^ping! 16:44, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Bakri Sapalo

The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Ambrosius Aurelianus

Just ran across this. I'm travelling, no time to work on it, but it has questions in it, the use of 'we', OR, etc. So if you ever have time.... Dougweller (talk) 04:58, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

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

TFOWR^{idle vapourings} 10:14, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TFOWR

If you want to add your co-nom, by all means go ahead. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

... and if you don't do it soon I'll beat you to it! :) Amalthea 23:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

We're waiting for TFOWR to accept the nomination. I think the answers he's given at User:TFOWR/Sandbox are good enough, but despite a general "let's draft TFOWR for Admin" feeling we shouldn't force him into submitting a formal request until he's ready. (But if you want to be a co-nom, feel free to add your name. I wonder just how many we can accumulate before TFOWR decides to formally accept it... ) -- llywrch (talk) 03:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I think more than three names up there tend to be detrimental, so I'll make it an elaborate conom-in-disguise-support instead. :) As far as I understand he'll certainly go ahead with it sooner or later, so I think you can flesh yours out without worrying that he might decline. Cheers, Amalthea 09:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, he accepted & the nomination is now live. -- llywrch (talk) 16:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Which unblock template to use

Hi Llywrch. In this comment: User talk:B9 hummingbird hovering#Final warning, you advised the editor to use {{unblock reviewed}}. I think {{unblock}} would be more logical since that is how a blocked user nomally makes a request. EdJohnston (talk) 18:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

NPOV and Elections in Ethiopia

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#Elections in Ethiopia. Gyrofrog (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}}) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

• P.S. See also: WP:SPI/GchDenver (if you have the time). Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 00:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, 'twas a whole drawer full: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CUDz/Archive#01 June 2010. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)

The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Expert?

Levine is considered an expert in the field. Saying that his "His research method is not indicated" is not a sufficient reason -- discuss this on the talk page)

Fine. I feel sorry for the people who will be mislead by an outright lie. I was born and raised in Debre Birhan and I know for sure what he said was absolutely false. But he is an expert. What do I know about my own town?

Thank spam!

Hello, Llywrch. You have new messages at User:TFOWR/Thankspam.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

And thanks also for co-nominating me - I appreciate the trust you've placed in me. I promise to do my best to live up to the trust you've placed in me. TFOWR 20:35, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviews

Please see my talk page its last section, where B9 hummingbird hover... left me a message whom you blocked indefinetly on 2 June. Although I did not understand him , so I thought to enquire here ????????? What's the matter ???????????? --Extra 999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 10:14, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm he sent me a day before you blocked him (sent me on 1 and was blocked on 2) and it appears in his contribs. --Extra 999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 10:53, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Well Wishes

Checked out your userpage (looking for a new layout for mine) and seen about your daughter. Hope she gets better quickly. Being sick sucks and I wish her the best and will say a prayer for her. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 05:41, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

My goof...but there is a prayer floating her way just in case. :) Thanks for the well wishes. Getting back in the swing of things myself. Still moving kinda slow (not too slow though) but that is getting better day-by-day. Take Care. :) - NeutralHomer • Talk • 06:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

FYI

You had previously participated in an Admin recall petition for Herostratus, at the user's talk page. This process has now started. It is ongoing as an RFA page, for admin recall, at: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Herostratus 2. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Contemporary media reporting on the Holocaust

Oh good, someone else thought of this! When the AfD closes and the dust settles, would you be interested in working on such an article? I've pasted in some sources into the AfD. Fences&Windows 18:15, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer rights

Don't we already have this as Administrators? Dougweller (talk) 07:59, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

^Yes. You should remove your reviewer rights, Llwrch, it's redundant, and you're being double counted as both a reviewer and a sysop. –xeno^talk 20:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I didn't think it mattered, & I had forgotten that I had done it until now. (For the record, doing this didn't make any difference AFAICT.) -- llywrch (talk) 20:19, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Not a huge difference, no. Just eliminates a redundant userright. We could assign ourselves rollback, account creator, reviewer, confirmed user and autopatroller, but there would be no point and it would cause an erroneous increase in the counts of these usergroups (which usually add the $NUMBEROFSYSOPS when determining the total number). –xeno^talk 20:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. Strange, there's apparently some newfangled functions in "reviewer" that sysops don't have! But I don't think those features are enabled here. –xeno^talk 20:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I didn't see those features when I was testing reviewed versions, but I wasn't looking for them. Maybe you ought to assign yourself those rights & verify that they aren't enabled. (I'm not going to test that permission again. ;-) -- llywrch (talk) 22:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Tiptoety checked it out and didn't see anything new. I think it's a feature of flagged revisions that we don't use here. –xeno^talk 12:47, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Chuck Marean

Per you comment here [3], thought you might also like to see this where a bit of the community has weighed in on the matter. Heiro 05:35, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LII (June 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Misrepresentation of source in Ebionites

Please see Talk:Ebionites#Misrepresentation of Tabor and offer your opinions on the matter, and of course feel free to consult the book itself. I would also like to perhaps communicate to you more directly regarding your input in a matter which might be worth discussing regarding that article. Please leave me a message or send me an email if you would be interested in receiving such a message. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 19:04, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Rather than soliciting double-secret email exchanges, as you tried to do with me, you might consider working on the article with a more cooperative spirit and assume your fellow editors are acting in good faith. Just a thought. Ovadyah (talk) 15:25, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Please limit any communications between the two of you to your own talk pages. I am attempting to work with both of you in good faith & while so far I have no reason not to continue to do so, exchanging accusations on other people's talk pages makes assuming good faith difficult. -- llywrch (talk) 16:05, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Any interest in peer reviewing the Rosetta Stone article?

Hello there:

Another user and I have been working extensively on the Rosetta Stone article. It has undergone extensive revisions in the past month and I am looking for potential reviewers who can ensure that it will be able to pass Feature Article review. Since you have been active in the past on articles having to do with Ancient Egypt, I thought I should call on you to give it a once over.

Hope you can help. Cheers! Captmondo (talk) 01:00, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. My apologies, I should have been more specific: could you please post these same comments to the peer review page?

I tested the image you mentioned and you are quite right, for some reason it does not appear when viewed in Internet Explorer. Will look into that and figure out a solution. Cheers! Captmondo (talk) 11:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Peer review/Somalia/archive1

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Peer review/Somalia/archive1. Gyrofrog (talk) 16:59, 12 July 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}}) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:59, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

You know what, never mind, treat it as more of an FYI rather than an invitation or suggestion. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Ebionites

For what it might be worth, you might be interested in the section containing material from encyclopedic sources at User talk:John Carter/Ebionites#Encyclopediac sources. I will state up front that material which is effectively duplicated in several encyclopediac sources is probably omitted from the later sources which I found which say that, for space reasons. However, I think that pretty much everything said in them not covered by others is included in the appropriate section, so it would possibly be a useful starting point to determine the various aspects of the existing academic opinion on the subject. Given our lack of space requirements, I personally think that most every topic included in an encyclopedia article should probably be referenced in our own, allowing for changes in scientific credit the idea might receive, other changes, etc. Of course, you are free to check any other such sources, and possibly add them, particularly if you have access to other dictionaries/encyclopediae which discuss the topic. Also, you had earlier talked about good, better, and best sources. I personally think that the best sources are probably those used by other reference works, and that is why I created the section User talk:John Carter/Ebionites#Sources, specifically listing those listed in the bibliographies of encyclopediac content. If you have ready access to any of those items which I haven't already gotten ahold of, and if you actually want to spend that much time on this subject, I would be very happy if you were to do so. Thank you for taking an interest in the topic in any event. John Carter (talk) 20:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for 1960 Ethiopian coup

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:02, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

An Email

You have one. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:04, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Templates

Are you good at editing templates? I want to add a functionality to "Template:National Public Radio", I want to add a functionality to add a year when there are more than one so that {{National Public Radio|219932|2006}} so it will display "Conan O'Brien on National Public Radio in 2006". --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 02:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll figure it out again, I guess that is why I should have left notes to myself when I made the original template. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 05:05, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Well done, Sir

I raise my Pepsi to you for your reference of the Dead Parrot sketch. It, indeed, was pining for the fjords. :) Well done, Sir. Well done. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:49, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately I am not much of a reader. I am trying though. Starting out with the Complete Calvin & Hobbes, which if you were a fan is a must have and good lifting too...it weights 20+ pounds! Then I have the George Carlin autobiography to work on. One of these days I might get to the classics, but those are my starting books. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I have seen the movie, but haven't read the book. Been meaning to buy that movie...need to put that on my list to buy on Amazon, I will add the book too. I do, though, say when anyone says "I have a question", I answer "42, answer for everything". That always throws them. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Requested template

Concerning this, do you have an idea of the name you want the template to be located at, and is there any parameters you wish besides what was noted?— Dædαlus ^Contribs 06:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit Summary

Your edit summary here borders on a personal attack. Consider this a warning. N419BH 20:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I call them as I see them. BC/Delta would not be half the problem he eventually became had there not been so many people willing to enable his behavior. -- llywrch (talk) 20:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

That's fine, I just don't think characterizing an editor as a "monster" is very helpful. N419BH 20:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I see you made your first edit in January of this year, six months ago. Have a look at BC/Delta's record, which documents complaints made about him for years. His reputation got to the point that he adopted a new username. If that does not justify my use of that noun, then I guess you have no use for the opinions of an experienced editor who has seen a lot. -- llywrch (talk) 20:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I am fully aware of BC/Delta's record, his issues, and his arbcom cases. Furthermore, I'm not a "kid" as your edit summary suggests. I'm 21, will be 22 in three weeks, and a college graduate. My account has been registered since January 2009; I have only become active in the past 6 months. I am not disagreeing in any way with your characterization of the situation. I am taking issue with your choice of language. I'm sorry if I came off as harsh. N419BH 23:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

If you're referring to my edit comment, it was meant in jest; those of us who are oldtimers on Wikipedia sometimes consider those who have been here for a couple of years -- or less -- as newcomers; it is not meant to refer to your off-wiki biological age. And had you not told me your physical age, I would have pegged you a few years older than the age you confessed to. BTW, I'm puzzled by the direction this exchange is taking: do you have a point here, beyond letting me know that you don't [like] the words I choose to use in my edit summaries? -- llywrch (talk) 04:37, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, butting in here. No comment on the latter part of this discussion - you two can argue it out without my interference, I'm sure ;-) - just a comment on the edit summary. When I saw it scroll past on my watchlist I did not see it as an attack on BC/Delta, but rather a comment on the problem the community has created for itself. TFOWR 07:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

TFOWR, thanks for saying hi and offering your opinion. llywrch, thanks for clarifying what you meant. Me? WP:TROUT for being too quick on the trigger. Would have been better to have said "Some people might take issue with this comment". I'll be a little more tactful next time. Hope we can be friends; unlike most people with the {{adminsomeday}} userbox I'm very much interested in the bit and working toward it. Need more article contributions though, and obviously need to work on my interactions some. I apologize for that. Take care! N419BH 12:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

No offense taken, N419BH. I can see how you could misunderstand my comments although, as TFOWR says, I was referring to the situation, not BC/Delta himself. I didn't bring up that point since it might sound as if I were hair-splitting or WikiLawyering. Any way, unless you have more to add, shall we simply bring this thread to an end & move on? -- llywrch (talk) 16:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Works for me. Happy editing! N419BH 04:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

The Highwaymen case

Are you interested in writing an article on this topic[4]? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gavin.collins (talk • contribs) 20:59, 27 July 2010 --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 21:59, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

zoltan Simon

You were involved with this editor last year [5]. I don't know if you ever saw this: [6]. In any case, he's back with a new account (I think he lost his password, this isn't socking) and created an article about himself, Zoltan A. Simon, quickly deleted. I've twice removed material from Assyrian eclipse which is his own personal research. I'm telling you this because you were involved with him in the past and I thought you might be interested, and because there may, but hopefully won't, be problems with him. Dougweller (talk) 09:04, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Timeline of Tanzanian history

Hi Llywrch, you don't happen to have a source for this edit do you? I'm glad to see an earlier event added, but I'm trying to make sure every bit of that timeline is sourced in order to hopefully get it to WP:FL at some point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Belovedfreak (talk • contribs) 17:00, 4 August 2010

Ok, no problem. Thanks for going to that effort to look. I find it frustrating because I'd love to get it to FL standard, and then hopefully improve History of Tanzania, but I don't really have access to any good sources. It's still a welcome addition though, because the article's a bit thin on pre-colonial history. Thanks anyway, --BelovedFreak 20:24, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for looking those out, I would be very interested in seeing them. I don't have access to JSTOR though, so if you could help me get those articles somehow, that would be very much appreciated.--BelovedFreak 09:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

User:Dpmuk

I would like your help. User:Dpmuk is in no single article or article group specific page talking about my page moves. But only after 19 min that someone posts at Wikipedia_talk:Requested_moves#Need_a_move_review_of_User:Schwyz, he jumps in suggesting WP:RFC/U [7]. Some minutes later, without doing any other editing he goes to another users talk page and tries to get him on board for RFC/U. Four days ago he suggested WP:SPI [8]. Luckily he does not come to my talk page for what I perceive as Wikipedia:Harassment after I told him to only come for article specific reasons. I am discussing any problems that users have with specific page moves, I am always open to debate. I don't know why Dpmuk is attacking me all the time, without actually being interested in the moves itself. Schwyz (talk) 11:47, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I put it at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Dpmuk_-_Harassment. Maybe ANI is not the best place, but I don't know what to do else. This user does not seem to want to solve content issues, but to command other users so as they behave as he wishes. Schwyz (talk) 12:53, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Ebionite RFC

I am considering filing an RfC on the above article this weekend. I had earlier mentioned the possibility on the article's talk page, and although neither Michael nor Ovadyah have commented on that, they have commented subsequently on other matters, which might indicate that they are undecided on how to respond to the idea. However, I do have a few questions regarding how to file and set up an RfC which deals with multiple related topics. The questions I would like the RfC to address are

• whether the non-verifiable citations of Tabor should remain,
• whether any material dependent on those citations alone should be removed as unverifiable,
• questions regarding how to phrase the material indicating that the Ebionites have been linked to the Dead Sea Scrolls, and how much space it should be given, and how much if any space to give Eisenman's particular theories - I think Teicher deserves only passing mention
• how the bibliography should be constructed, particularly regarding prominent inclusion of Tsbor and Eisenman, which is partially dependent on one of the answers above
• whether the link to the Ebionite community, the first external link in the article, should be remain in that place, or others, like maybe links to Epiphanius' book, which contain more direct information should be placed first, and whether the links should have additional, descriptive, comments about them, and, lastly,
• whether the Ebionite Community link should be included at all, and, if yes, whether links to any other self-proclaimed Ebionite groups should be included as well. There is only one RS I know of, a book review, Revenge of the Ebionites which mentions neo-Ebionites. It is a review of a book about, basically, Judeo-Christian vegetarianism. The review says that "it" is a growing movement, but doesn't clearly specificy whether the growing "it" refers to neo-Ebionites or Judeo-Christian vegetarianism. Without at least one reliable source for the Ebionite Community, I would have to question whether it merits inclusion in the external links.

I realize that this is a complex matter. However, I personally think that my removing any material source to Tabor and Eisenman would create problems, and thus think that having the matters decided by RfC would be more effective. Certainly, leaving messages on the talk pages of the relevant Dead Sea Scrolls articles, the Judaism project, the Christianity project, and the Alternative Views project would be more likely to get informed, neutral input. Thank you in advance for any response. I as an individual, unfortunately, think filing an RfC as complicated as this is probably beyond my own personal experience. John Carter (talk) 19:47, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. I guess I agree with you that Tabor and Eisenman don't have problems others don't as well. The problem is, so far as I can tell, the possible violation of WP:V with some of the Tabor material, and the fact that, according to at least one source, The Dead Sea Scrolls Rediscovered by Stephen Hodge, ISBN 1-56795-333-4, p. 207, "Eisenman's hypothesis [regarding James as the ToR] has been largely rejected within the academic community." On that basis, I have to question whether having almost any material about a minority view which has also been basically "rejected" by academia can be counted as reflecting modern academic opinion. Minority opinion is one thing, rejected minority opinion is another. And I agree that there are innumerable problems saying anything about the Ebionites. Marcel Simon in Verus Israel said that there might have been Christian converts from every branch of then-current Judaism who became "Ebionites." But all that material has to be fitted into the article somehow, and I personally have trouble seeing how to do that.

It might be is true that this article is inherently a difficult one. Unfortunately, it also is probably either the first or second most important one regarding the early Jerusalem church, which is one of the most important topics within the field of Early Christianity, and I have to think that it deserves a better article than this. Maybe an RfC could give ideas about how to improve it, maybe not, I dunno. John Carter (talk) 17:15, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

You've had dealing with strange editors on another page, you mean, right? ;) Believe me, I understand the feeling, and cannot fault you for wanting to back away from difficult situations for a while. And God knows you've got more important things to do, like your daughter. Hope the inmates don't beat on your door too often in the near future. John Carter (talk) 00:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Protection of User:Δ/monobook.js

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Betacommand's prior editing restrictions, listed in full here, contains the following:

"2: For one year, you are ... (iii) prohibited from running automated scripts of whatever nature"

This motion was carried 11 July 2009. It has now expired. If you'd like, you can ask for an amendment to Betacommand's restrictions to indefinitely prevent him from using automated tools, but the restriction on him using automated tools placed 11 July 2009 has expired. The amendment to these restrictions did not contain language extending the ban on automated edits. Betacommand is within his rights to use automated editing tools. This file needs to be unprotected, pending clarification (if desired) from ArbCom. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pointer - year lists

Hi. In case you don't get back to the blisteringly long thread, I just wanted to point towards my reply to you at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Suggestion (call it point 2.1): Moving purely navigational lists out of article space. That's all. Feel free to reply wherever (here, there, my talk, the User:Quiddity/Navigational pages RfC's talk, or somewhere random!) :) -- Quiddity (talk) 23:22, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Paraphrasing

Would you consider adding the following statement to your essay on what is not OR? "Accurate paraphrasing of reliable sources is not considered original research." Precis (talk) 21:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Template:Emperors of Ethiopia

Llywrch, I moved this template to new name exactly because not all monarchs or Emperors of Ethiopia were part of the Solomonic dynasty. So, template should have a different name then "Template:SolomonicDynasty". Am I right? --Sundostund (talk) 20:03, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I must admit that I don't quite understand do you support this move or not? I'm sure it's better to call this template "Emperors of Ethiopia" then "SolomonicDynasty". As you said yourself, not all Ethiopian monarchs were members of the Solomonic Dynasty. So, it's not acceptable by me to revert template to it's old name. If you want some new name (eg. "Monarchs of Ethiopia"), it's also fine by me. --Sundostund (talk) 21:40, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

ANI thread

Thought you might be interested in a current ANI thread in which Ovadyah says that he never said "I hate you" on any page. Much to my surprise, I find that the edit comment with which he restored it has apparently been purged from his history. There is evidence that he had, up to now anyway, acknowledged it, so I have no idea what happened. I was wondering whether you, who were involved in the matter, can remember them. John Carter (talk) 22:51, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Haile Fida

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Milhist A-class and Peer Reviews Jul-Dec 2009

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews during the period July-December 2009, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:07, 1 September 2010 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Milhist A-Class and Peer reviews Jan-Jun 2010

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Jan-Jun 2010, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Ian Rose (talk) 09:41, 1 September 2010 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Talk:Wankers Corner, Oregon

If you have concerns over my editing, such as "I can't help but suspect that you are simply eager to prove your knowledge of policy to one & all by this crusade upon an otherwise unremarkable assertion" please address them to me on my talk page, rather than on an article talk page, where WP:TPG#YES reminds us to "Comment on content, not on the contributor". Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 19:12, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

So you are offended that I am being blunt about telling you how I understand what you say to me? Normally, I'd respond with something like "If the shoe fits, don't complain." But you appear eager to make a case out of this; if that is not the case, show me. -- llywrch (talk) 20:10, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Offended by bluntness no. Disappointed by discourtesy, yes. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 20:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Discourteous? I don't think that word means what you think it does. -- llywrch (talk) 20:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

OK, if you don't intend to have a civil discussion either about this article or our difference of opinion ... Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 20:41, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Sometimes the greatest kindness one can do is tell another person she/he is a fool. And if you think that is discourteous or incivil, WP:WQA is thataway. You've stopped being an entertaining distraction. -- llywrch (talk) 20:48, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

hi

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

--Soman (talk) 21:53, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

When re-reading the article, a question hit me. Whatever happened to the Seamen's Union after Eritrea's independence? (Considering that Ethiopia is now landlocked) --Soman (talk) 21:57, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies ^talk 19:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

• I'm newish here (hence my Talk page is still in flux, so I'd appreciate an answer here until I get it set up correctly, thanks). Could you explain the reference to PTB in your vote? I searched and found it had to do with horse racing. Is that the one you meant?? WesT (talk) 16:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
  • No problem. PTB="Power that be". It's a common 'Net acronym, & many of them are explained over at Wiktionary, like PTB. -- llywrch (talk) 16:13, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Excellent! Thanks for the pointer. There are so many acronyms here in WP that I often forget to check the common ones.  :-) WesT (talk) 16:39, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Dʿmt

So far as I can tell, there are alternate spellings, eg [[9]], but they aren't in the article (ran into this as an IP is busy messing up related articles). Do you know anything about this? Dougweller (talk) 21:08, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. My problem is that searching on the article's name comes up with nothing in Google books, one article in G scholar, which isn't very helpful. So I'm wondering if we need to have alternate spellings, redirects, maybe even a different title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 10:01, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Doing too much

Thank you for your comments, and even more for your advice. It is a fact of WP life that the more you do the more controversy you will get involved in - even if you are doing fairly uncontroversial things - a basic "noise level" - and it is also true that I got busy a couple of weeks ago - made a few errors in handling things, and hence the "blow up". Nonetheless we will, in time, resolve all the issues (except possibly one or two editors who seem to hold grudges) and the robots will be able to continue to build the encyclopedia, unmolested... Thanks again. Rich Farmbrough, 20:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC).

User:Radiojon

In answer to your comment at ANI. Possibly I've oversold the use of WP:RESTRICT. It is really just an index to where decisions have been taken by agreement. (For example in that ANI thread). No objection if you believe this step is unnecessary. You can always cite WP:IAR if the problem recurs, but WP:RESTRICT requires breaking less china. Since Radiojon is steadfastly ignoring all feedback, I feel that it's only a matter of time before he returns to the behavior that people were concerned about. EdJohnston (talk) 20:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Your comments at WP:AN

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

We all get a little overwrought at times and make bad faith statements we had rather not.

In this comment [10] you describe the removal of a FA tag from an article as "disruptive", fair enough if you think that kind of thing is disruptive in some way, but it's odd. What you said next seems even more odd:

And one has to wonder why he routinely obscures his user name; could it be that people might respond differently to a post signed by Tony Sidaway than if it were signed by "TS" or "Tasty monster"?

That seems uncalled for. Many editors contract their usernames in their signatures: Nuclear Warfare on the same thread uses "NW", Shell Kinney the arbitrator is "Shell", and many other prominent editors use contractions. I do edit in my real name, which I think makes me much more open than many other Wikipedians. For information about Tasty monster, see the collapsed notice at the top of User talk:Tony Sidaway. It's no secret, it's just a telephone I use when I'm out and about.

In short, your comment as quoted above is misleading and uncalled for.

So please, please, less of this nastiness. It really isn't a good thing to do. --TS 03:47, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

You're a drama queen, Sidaway. I'm just reminding people of that. And there's nothing nasty about speaking the truth, although it is cleansing. -- llywrch (talk) 04:06, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh come on, I just looked at your contribution history. After all this time you know better than to dish up this lame rubbish. The more you call me names the more attention I get, and that's what drama queens want, right? So why are you doing it, if you think I'm a drama queen? --TS 04:25, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Re: Constantine III (western emperor)

Hi Llywrch,

Thanks for the feedback. I am going through a period at the moment of just updating Roman and Byzantine articles with sources and citations - many are in sore need of such work. Unfortunately, my access to secondary sources is somewhat limited (hence my reliance on Gibbon and Bury), so I tend to also cite from primary sources to try to bolster the range of sources used throughout the articles. That being said, the general narrative of Constantine's career is what it is, so using an old source to verify the information presented in the article is better than having no source at all. It is more of an issue about updating the core facts with new details that have been uncovered in the years since. If you have any suggestions for more recent secondary online sources that I can access easily, I would be most appreciative. Regards :) Oatley2112 (talk) 22:52, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Shiny!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For closing the RfC on the ArbCom elections, and doing as good a job as could possibly be done under difficult circumstances, I am proud to award you this star. Sven Manguard Talk 23:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I came here independently to thank you for doing a difficult task with skill and neutrality. Tony (talk) 14:50, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Link fix on my homepage

Thanks for the link fix. It's been up there a while, I guess the fact it wasn't noticed before means it doesn't get much traffic! Dick G (talk) 12:03, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

FYI

FYI: Interesting (ongoing) AfD debate about the article "Archimedes, Inc." (article’s lead supporter was permanently blocked mid-debate with charges of paid editing.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by LucyLB (talk • contribs) 19:55, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: AfD

It wouldn't be the first time, there is a substantial amount of evidence that User:Danieldis47 and Use:Etalssrs were associates (although not necessarily the same user), having edited the same group of articles, with the same promotional tone (see the related AfDs Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insurance Licensing Services of America, Inc. and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arleen Taveras). Having participated in the dispute, I don't think he wasn't blocked purely for advertising (although that did play a big part), but also for disruptive canvassing for !votes by notifying everyone in the page history, even if their edit was as small as correcting a typo in a COI or cleanup template, failing to respond to a COI concern and cooperate despite large amounts of off-wiki evidence of a clear COI, along with the aforementioned earlier evidence of meatpuppetry. I have no idea why the user contacted you specifically, but an associate of the user seems to be canvassing again.--res Laozi speak 23:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if he'll continue to canvas (although he might). It may be better to go with a wait-and-see approach. Hopefully he won't. :)--res Laozi speak 23:29, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Shabo

Thanks for pointing this out - I should have checked the link myself, but since I copied it from the paper itself, I trusted it. I have now corrected the link. Best regards, Landroving Linguist (talk) 05:32, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Asmara

I'm in a disagreement on the Asmara article, so a neutral outside opinion would help in a resolution. More info on my and Judygreenberg's talk pages. Mesfin (talk) 12:07, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Messages

Hello, Llywrch. You have new messages at Guoguo12's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Irish

"only surviving member of its branch". Huh? I think the approximately 40,000 native speakers of Scottish Gaelic might object to that... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comhreir (talk • contribs) 16:38, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Gambela zones and weredas

Hi Llywrch, I noticed that you try to make some sense out of administrative divisions in Gambela region. I was struggling with the same stuff when I was trying to reconcile the information I found in the new census information with what is already there in Wikipedia. But probably the new census is the best source we can go by right now, as it is from the government, and maybe the Wikipedia information needs to have a complete overhaul in this respect. I won't have the time to do it - are you at it anyway ? If so, then I won't meddle with instances where I have a vested interest, like Majang language, where your current edit left behind a dead link. Another thing: I also noticed you demoting the importance tag of languages from top to high in the languages project box. I commented on that here, which you may not have noticed if you don't watch the page. Landroving Linguist (talk) 06:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

The quite dead link right now is Mezhenger Zone - which previously I identified with Godere special woreda, but maybe mistakenly. If you intend to create an article for Mezhenger Zone, then no harm is done - the link will become blue then. About the Languages project: This project looks at countless articles, not just languages themselves - anything to do with linguistics, language attitude, etc. The project decided that any article dealing with a real language is of top importance for that project, as this addresses the core of the project. There are many other articles with minor importance ranking in that project. So, just the fact that Shabo language is a language with an own ISO 639-3 code makes it top, according to the criteria of the project, regardless of all other criteria. This is probably not very well explained in the project scale, but this is in effect what it says. Landroving Linguist (talk) 11:15, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Help with vandalism!

Hi there! I need little help in fight against vandalism on articles about Ukrainians and Ukrainian culture and history in general. Several well known users obviously intentionally break rules of Wikipedia. They are most active on the talk page - Talk:Ukrainians. These users often delete sources and then set their own inaccurate interpretation with no sources. The same users often delete every trace of Ukrainian impact in Russian history and culture on other articles. This is a very serious issue because same users do not allow me and some other users to work on the same issues objectively for a long time. Closely following their activities, it can be said that this is pure anti-ukrainian sentiment which borders with fascism. There is a small informational war against the Ukrainians, their culture and selfidentification! These are powerful words but they have their background. You can check itself and the work of these contributors. Please do something, or forward this appeal to the responsible administrators. Thanks a lot!--SeikoEn (talk) 17:23, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

HNY

Thank you for your help on my edits. Sometimes I wax too eloquently and "stuff".  ;-) Have a great New Year~ Namaste...DocOfSoc (talk) 03:55, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

No apology needed but TY! I would love some help with the Bell Scandal article if you care to meander in. Nice working with you. Namaste...DocOfSoc (talk) 04:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

pwned, sucka

Re[11] see [][12]. Beat you by 3 minutes. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 01:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Milhist A-Class and Peer Reviews Oct–Dec 2010

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Oct–Dec 2010, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:10, 5 January 2011 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Ethiopia – People's Republic of China relations

Hi Llywrch. I was recently reviewing pages that were indefinitely fully edit protected and I came across Ethiopia – People's Republic of China relations which you fully protected a month ago to stop move vandalism by one user. I was wondering if perhaps full move protection might be appropriate, or possibly just a block of the one user who tried to move? Just wanted to make sure other contributors can edit the page (although I personally have no current edits to make). I'm not an admin, so if you could do the unprotect if you think that's appropriate, I'd appreciate it. Hope you're having a great day!--Gnowor^T_C 23:03, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Conflict of interest noticeboard

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:COIN#Ebionites regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ovadyah (talk) 21:27, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

As someone who participated in discussions on the Ebionites article talk page and two incident reports on AN/I involving this content dispute, I thought you might want to know about this. Ovadyah (talk) 21:29, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

3RR

Hi Llywrch. One User:Danlaycock has just reported [13] me on the 3RR noticeboard for what he claims is "revert-warring". The situation is highly disingenuous since I actually only ever reverted twice (as did he, ironically enough), and so did another involved editor (whom he tellingly did not report). I've attempted to set the record straight, but I'm not certain if I'll get a fair shake. I would therefore definitely appreciate it if you were to keep an eye on the post just to make sure nothing fishy happens. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 05:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Just stopped by to thank you for your helpful comments on the 3RR board. It's heartening to know that there are at least some fair contributors left on this website. Cheers, Middayexpress (talk) 03:29, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikistalking

Hi Llywrch. I need your advice on something. There is an account that's been following me around from page to page, making nonsense edits in a quite obvious attempt to get me to revert them so that he/she might then report me for "edit warring" and thus get me blocked and/or banned. The latest edit involves a personal bio where the account unjustifiably removed the sourced names of the mother and father of the person in question, rather absurdly claiming that they are "not relevant" to the person's bio. I would like your opinion on how best to handle the situation. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 20:50, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good, but how do I contact you? Middayexpress (talk) 20:59, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'm not seeing the "Email this user" link on the left hand side. Should it be under the "Toolbox" drop down menu or somewhere else perhaps? Do I need to have something enabled on my end first? Middayexpress (talk) 21:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I see a "Contact Wikipedia" link under the "Interaction" drop down menu, but not an "Email this user" link under "Toolbox". However, I think I figured out what the problem is. The "My Preferences" area indicates that one cannot send or receive emails unless one's email address is confirmed, and mine apparently hasn't yet been confirmed. I'm in the process of confirming it though, so I'll try and get back to you soon about the link. Cheers, Middayexpress (talk) 21:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I've confirmed the address and can see the "Email this user" link now. I'll send a message shortly, and thanks again. Middayexpress (talk) 21:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Mabinogion

nice work Decora (talk) 14:54, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

better late than never? Decora (talk) 18:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

ANI discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at WP:ANI#User:Menilek's credentials and behavior. Gyrofrog (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}}) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Women's history

I have been going through lists of female rulers. Many of them may lack a Wikipedia article. But information about them exists on articles about their dynasty, state or the figurehead they were using. Tagging said article seems better than starting creating redirects or stubs already. Dimadick (talk) 09:02, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Ethopian elections

No problem, and you're right, it is hard to find info - I've had to get the book I'm using out from the British Library... Unfortunately it only covers up to 1999, so I'm afraid I don't have any info for the referendum. Number 57 09:09, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Menilek

Why did you say I should have cited the works of E. A. Wallis Budge, when I actually DID? In fact, his translation of the Kebra Negast was one of my 2 major sources. Also, C.F. Rey's book publishes in the Appendix, the complete list of monarchs to rule over the land, showing names, years, length of reign, etc going back WELL over 6000 years to Aram, grandson of Adam and Eve, the first monarch to rule the Horn. It shows ALL of the dynasties and all of the monarchs in each of them and was supplied by Emperor Haile Selassie I himself to Sir Rey for the purpose of inclusion in Rey's book, so that you and the entire world could see what the royal record says about how far back the monarchy goes, no doubt anticipating that some johnny-come-lately would try to say that our empire does not go back so far as it does,(I think some article you endorse on here has said that it goes back no further than the 12th century, which is utter nonsense). The royal record I am citing shows what I said to NOT be merely my "own fringe point of view" as you so libelously charged me, before knowing all the facts. I have documented my points made, so if you are still skeptical you are faced with two choices here: Accuse Emperor Haile Selassie of lying to Sir Rey or accuse Sir Rey, a knighted British Noble, of lying to his readers. But you can not truthfully say that I cited irrelevant sources or that I am without sources. Rey is seen as not just an adventurer, as you claim, but as a historian, as an ambassador, a diplomat and as an expert in his field of study. You say he was just an explorer. What do you think he was exploring there? Amharic crossword puzzles? I think it is shameful, your thinly veiled attempt to belittle such great noblemen's service to the crown of Britain.

You also jump to conclusions that I am giving my own POV when in fact I am representing the history and faith of my people. You speak as if I were the outsider and you were not, (regarding my people and our history), when the reverse is actually the case,(IE: you are the outsider, looking in). Tell me, please, why should I not see that as blatant arrogance when ill-informed outsiders try to tell a people that you know our history better than our own people, much less more than our own specialists? You speak as if we're a people who have nobody who is more knowledgeable of our own history than you foreigners do as if we are all just a bunch of ignorant dirt farmers totally devoid of education. Perhaps you might also prefer that we refer to you as "Great Bwana", no? After all, by the way you speak of me, you are implying that we are inferior to outsiders in our capacity to accurately convey facts about intelligent subject matter such as our own history. How would it be unreasonable if I were to view that as blatantly arrogant? That is a valid question.

Furthermore, as for what you considered a mistake of syntax in the way I discuss one of my non-favorite Emperors, you forgot the fact that you have no clue where I grew up or even what may be my first language. Maybe you never heard of a little thing called the DIASPORA. But go ahead and assume some more. Just remember what English teachers often say occurs when one assumes. But even so, you are wrong. When speaking to foreigners it is not unheard of for Emperors names to be abbreviated when they consist of more than one word. My namesake is such an example. Nobody in speaking puts the II there. They expect you to know from the context if one is speaking of Menilek I or II. Even the wiki articles in question give examples of this being done, such as in the case of Ras Alula, for example. I know when someone is just looking for an excuse to join a dogpile. Your use of pejoratives toward me (such as "kook") gives your unprofessional biased attitude away. Why else would you resort to name-calling, which itself is a violation of the rules, as I have read.

[Menilek]   ጥሩ ምኒልክ (ራስነቢይ የ ቤት ዪሥራእል / አበምኔት ቢሥርዓት ናዝረታዊ) 11:55, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Sigh. There is no libel in stating the truth. And read the books I pointed you to. I have nothing further to say to you, so kindly refrain from posting on my talk page again. -- llywrch (talk) 16:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Request for input to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Ebionites_2

A request for arbitration on the Ebionites article has recently been filed. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Ebionites_2 Please feel free to add any comments you believe appropriate. Ovadyah (talk) 18:10, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

There is a lot of support for your participation in formal mediation on the Ebionites article. Would you be willing to endure some self-inflicted pain to resolve this content dispute? Let Jayjg know if you decide you are interested. Thanks. Ovadyah (talk) 02:14, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Expert tag

Llywrch, I applied an expert tag to the Ebionites article as the last thing I did when I left the article for good (or so I thought) back in October 2007. expert tag added There it stayed until Sept. 2010 when Ret. Prof removed it. expert tag removed You might reasonably ask, how many experts stopped by during those three years to comment on or otherwise improve the article? The answer would be zero. It was not for lack of trying. When Loremaster and I were preparing the article for FAC in early 2007, I sent emails to Bart Ehrman, E.P. Sanders, Mark Goodacre, and James Tabor, asking them if they would be willing to provide us with direction for further improvements to the article. Mark G. and James Tabor graciously responded. They both politely told me thanks, but no thanks. There were not willing to spend their valuable time on Wikipedia. Therein lies the rub as they say - the people that know don't care, and the people that care don't know. Ovadyah (talk) 00:50, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: Signpost commentary

Hey mate, I noticed your comments in the Signpost regarding monetary rewards for editing. I prefer not to clog public forums with one-on-one conversations, so I thought I would bring it here instead. You mentioned that with an employer and a family, the time spent contributing to Wikipedia detracts from the time spent with the other two, and that having monetary rewards would make time spent here more worthwhile. My question for you is this: Wouldn't you be afraid that if you were to start receiving monetary compensation for the effort that you put into Wikipedia, editing would shift from [something you enjoy doing for its own sake] to [yet another obligation that you must fulfill]?

Consider that, as much as we all enjoy what we do here, there are those days where we really don't feel like doing any serious editing, and instead find ourselves bopping around the encyclopedia aimlessly. In the case that you were making a bit of extra cash from your editing, and particularly in the case that you or your spouse lose your/his/her job and money is tight, I would imagine that there would be no way to prevent the feelings of pressure to edit. I don't know about you, but I know that the quality of my work would diminish significantly if that kind of pressure ever existed, and I might lose interest in the project entirely. I can think of very few things that would quite as detrimental to my psyche and worldview as the situation I just described. Would it really be worth it to risk throwing all of this away for a few extra shekels here and there?

Curious to hear your thoughts. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 04:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I definitely agree with the sentiment that you expressed in the first paragraph of your response: if there is nothing wrong with the content, then there is nothing wrong with the motivations behind its creation, even if they include monetary ones.

One of my concerns with paid editing is that there must necessarily exist some metric for determining who gets paid, and I can't think of any metric that would work well. Payment by number of edits would be far too easy to manipulate, and it devalues the contributions of those who prefer to craft articles offline and then post them all at once. Payment by number of words/paragraphs would encourage editors to include unnecessary details or to be overly circuitous in their phrasing. Payment by FAs/GAs would encourage authors to conceal issues rather than discuss them openly with other editors, and it would encourage authors to go along with anything that anyone says at FAC, even if the suggestions make the articles worse. Even if objectivity is not an issue (and your point about journalists is a good one), there are many other ways that the quality of an article can suffer as a result of extrinsic motivation.

I suspect you may not believe me when I say this, but in response to your question about whether or not I would turn down the money, I think that I would—but I do realize that I would be in the minority by saying that. It's important to note that I'm young, completely non-materialistic, and extremely stubborn about my principles (heck, most people my age don't even have principles to be stubborn about!). --Cryptic C62 · Talk 23:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Wand Bewossen

Sorry about the naming order. I use AWB, so I don't see the edit summary and don't normally read the talk page comments. This time I didn't use AWB and noticed. Next time, make sure listas (on the talk page) and DEFAULTSORT (main article) are filled in. That way the article doesn't get on a todo list and some idiot like me doesn't come around and mess things up. Got to love names.... my favorite is Burmese. They may or may not have a surname and they change names throughout their lives. I still haven't figured out Arabic or Icelandic names. Bgwhite (talk) 23:32, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I've come across a couple other Ethiopianish names. I thought I'd ask you how to sort the names before I make a mess of them.

Ugaas Abdulrahman Muhumad Qani

Ugaz Abdulrahman Abd Ghani

Bgwhite (talk) 23:52, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok... If I use "normal" Arabic indexing conventions, I would then sort these as "Qani, Abdulrahman Muhumad, Ugaas" and "Abd Ghani, Abdulrahman, Ugaz"??? Bgwhite (talk) 00:25, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Boy. Arabic names are so fun. You are definitely correct about the indexing if they were before 1900. They weren't and after 1900 is a mess. I've been using this as reference... because my brain can understand that paper. According to the paper, I think I'm right, but there are so many different historical, regional and who know what reasons. AHHHHH my brain hurts. I will ask Middayexpress. Bgwhite (talk) 06:23, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

CSI effect

Greetings from Bangkok! I have found, much to my pleasant surprise, that my hotel room offers free internet access. I intend to submit CSI effect to FAC once I get back to Boston, but before I do that, I would like to have it read by one more uninvolved editor to make sure that it is clear, concise, and comprehensive. Would you like to be that editor? If our conversation on paid contributing is any indication of your work ethic, then I would greatly appreciate your opinion on my work. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 09:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, mate. I definitely agree that we should be writing for the people who have no prior knowledge of the subject, so the suggestions you've made were exactly what I was looking for. I'll make an effort to address/discuss them each once I get back home and have more time to accessify the interwebs. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 10:56, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Ancient Egypt

I completely understand people going on to do other things, in real life or on Wikipedia. Writing or rewriting articles is a lot of work, and I appreciate anyone who does it on any subject. I'm determined to improve the articles on Egyptian religion as much as I can, no matter how long it takes—but I have an unusual capacity for obsession and stubbornness. My frustration is not so much that I don't have help, but that I can't work as fast as I want to. Anyway, I have all the Egyptian religion pages on my watchlist, and I'll keep a closer eye on the rest of the subject from now on. If you ever decide to come back to the project, I'll at least make sure that it hasn't gotten worse in the meantime. A. Parrot (talk) 23:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Ethiopian sort order

I've come across four Ethiopian names that had different orders or no order in DEFAULTSORT/Listas.

Tekle Hawaryat   Tekle Haymanot   Tekle Haymanot of Gojjam   Tekle Kiflay

I sorted them as Hawaryat, Tekle.... which is most likely wrong. Should I have done "Tekle Hawaryat"? Bgwhite (talk) 01:03, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes. It's confusing, but there are different types of Ethiopian names. This one is a Ge'ez (Classical Ethiopic) compound name meaning 'plant of faith' and should be treated as one word beginning with T. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 03:21, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank You. I'm always in a state of confusion, so confusing names are just background noise :) Bgwhite (talk) 05:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Some more names. Names starting with Tesfaye and Tesfai... "Tesfaye Alebachew" and Tesfai Ghirmazion (eritrean) Bgwhite (talk) 01:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Duncorn Hill

I notice you closed the AfD as "no consensus" and suggested there would be consensus as there was no agreement on the notability of geographical landmarks. As there is no agreement on a notability policy for such landmarks, surely we should fall back to the general notability guideline, yet you made no mention of assessing the AfD on this basis. It seems rather strange to suggest that we cannot delete an article unless there is agreement on a wider policy for article of that type. If we take this article on it's own merits, and put aside the interesting but inconclusive debate about the wider picture, then it's clear there is not significant coverage in reliable sources - so surely a delete is the correct option? --Pontificalibus (talk) 16:33, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Llywrch. You have new messages at Pontificalibus's talk page.
Message added 18:36, 14 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Felix Cole

Afraid not, sorry - this is the first time I've heard of him. Regardless, he sounds like an...interesting character, to say the least.

Excellent article - keep up the good work, and happy editing! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:33, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Duncorn Hill

Hi, I left another reply on my talk page that I would appreciate a response to (no hurry!). I just want to say I am not attacking you or anything, and appreciate the work you are doing, it's simply that I have a local connection to the hill and would like clarification on this issue.--Pontificalibus (talk) 09:18, 15 March 2011 (UTC)