User:Heironymous Rowe/Talk archive April 2012 to April 2013

Busy busy busy

As you can probably see. Dougweller (talk) 16:32, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed. I was actually working on something for the Garden Creek site article when the above happened, lol. My first block in all my years here, and over something as stupid and trivial as that. Anyway, here it is if you wanna add it in for me before I lose it.

The two villages located on the site were occupied from 600 CE to 1200 CE, first by Woodland period Hopewellian peoples and later by Pisgah Phase people of the South Appalachian Mississippian culture (a regional variation of the Mississippian culture).

I've been working on gathering information and sources for a South Appalachian Mississippian culture article, so that shouldn't stay a red link for long. I think I may just take the 24 hrs as a break from this place. Good luck with it, Cheers. Heiro 16:38, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit. You can work on your article offline anyway, in a text editor or word. I did post to the blocking Admin (& mentioned the insult) but it was more of a content dispute although probably pov (I can find what look like RS for both cities, no one seems to be sure since Katrina). I am very careful myself except where vandalism is very obvious. Have you read WP:Vandalism recently? Given that rightly or wrongly you've had warnings before, and now a block, you need to be very careful - try to stay at 2RR. Time usually solves these problems, you know. Dougweller (talk) 17:57, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I saw that and thanks, I appreciate the support. Decided to take the 24 hrs and think about exactly how much time I spend at this time sink and what I get out of it. I still think the IP was here to troll and vandalize. I don't think they are as new an editor as they claim, from their language(plenty of Wikipedia "code" words) and a cell phone popping up moments later to reinsert their edit [1], avoiding sanctions for continuing an edit war. Anyway, neither here nor there now, I've decided to leave vandal patrol to others, people who have the patience to post 5 please, please dont do thats and then wait on someone to eventually drop by AIV. I'll focus on some article content when I feel like it and leave the rest of it to others. Thanks for standing up for me, I really do appreciate it and sorry for the bother, cheers. Heiro 16:40, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I think Wikipedia gets a lot out of your edits, especially on article content. Don't give up on vandalism, but stick to the ones that are obvius and not say just npov - it's difficult to argue that the name thing about the governor is vandalism, for instance. Have you looked at what I've been doing? I did a merge but I think it was justified. Hopefully I've dealt with Thornton's edits but I'll take another look tomorrow. Dougweller (talk) 18:06, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I saw a lot of what you did, looks good. As for the governor issue, I'm not sure that's the last we'll be seeing of that. There's a lot of talk about the possibility of Romney tagging Jindal as his vp running mate. I've started to see more people in social media trying to pull a Barack Hussein Obama on Jindal already, making sure people know his real name and its not "amurican", etc. I just don't think this is the place for that political war, even tho I fall 180 degrees on the political spectrum from Jindal. But I'm going to let other people deal with that issue if it pops up. I've already cut my watchlist in half, removing I think all pages where contentious pov pushing shows up most. My 24 hrs let me get a little perspective. I don't come here to get into fights with anonymous IPhopping jackasses, I come here because I like researching, writing and sharing articles on subjects I'm personally interested in and when I'm here I'm going to try and stick to that. Let someone else sort out which IPs are trying to help and which are inserting subtle inaccuracies and political shenanigans. I have too many other things IRL to stress about, I'm not going to let this be one of them. Cheers, Heiro 18:41, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Block log barnstar

		The block log Barnstar
		(award details) - I would like to use this opportunity to thank User:Heironymous Rowe for his fine contributions to Wikipedia over the years and welcome him to the contributors that got a little heated club and allegedly made that caring extra revert. Many thanks for all your work here. Respect and best wishes to you from Youreallycan 18:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, lol. I feel a little like young Henry Hill in Goodfellas when he get outta jail for the first time. Heiro 16:41, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Thats a great movie. Welcome back. - Youreallycan 18:03, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Fresh page

Archived, too much nonsense lately, start a new section for new business please.Heiro 16:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

NPS images

We've run into several different types of situations with images from NPS websites. Perhaps the most common is uncredited images; for these we have no reason to believe that they're privately created, so we unhesitatingly upload them as {{PD-USGov-NPS}}. When images are credited, we do one of several things:

• If we can determine that the author is an NPS employee, we upload with {{PD-USGov-NPS}}
• If we can determine that the image is safe for other reasons (e.g. some of the ones in the DeSoto slideshow, which are PD-old), we use them unhesitatingly with the proper tag
• If we can't ascertain the author's identity, or if we can conclude that the author is non-USGov, we don't use the image.

Hope this helps. Nyttend (talk) 01:26, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 16

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Fort Walton Mound (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Temper

Fort Walton culture (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Temper

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:29, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23

Hi. When you recently edited Lake Jackson Mounds Archaeological State Park, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Griffin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Wulfing cache

Saw the DYK? Nom and was wondering where are the plates now and are they on display anywhere? Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 18:11, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30

Hi. When you recently edited Etowah plates, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bronze disease (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

CabUrn

I finally got impatient and just went through and corrected wherever I saw it. I hope the image linking hasn't gotten messed up [that's why I didn't make the correction when I first spotted the typo]. Kdammers (talk) 05:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Nah, I requested the rename when you asked, and at Commons it creates a redirect for the old title, so it will show up with either spelling. A bot used to rename stuff like that but I guess something happened to it. I've been so busy I just forgot to look and see if it had been done. Sorry about that. Heiro 05:51, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Pensacola culture

Nice! You mentioned noticing it was on my to-do list. It had been there for 6 years, and I don't know when I would have gotten around to it. I chip away a little at that list every once in a while. I'm just hoping to eventually see decent articles about all of the cultures that have been described for Florida. And after that, there are all those important sites. :) And now I'm thinking that I need to go back and review all the articles I worked on over the past 6 1/2 years, fix my mistakes and misunderstandings, and incorporate material from sources I didn't look at before. -- Donald Albury 00:32, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, books. I've picked up a few since I started editing in WP. I picked up a few more last month at a book sale. The local public library has a useful selection, and so does the local history museum (although those can't be checked out). It seems to me that more good stuff is available on-line than there was 6 years ago, or maybe I've gotten better at finding it. All of The Florida Anthropologist, The Florida Historical Quarterly and Tequesta are on-line, as well as some dissertations that I've found useful. I keep telling myself that I should go the university library, but parking near there is impossible. And what I don't find in all that is much about the Pensacola people. The connection between Pensacola people and Pensacola culture may be tenuous. I very recently found this (see note 2) suggesting that the people that the Spanish knew as 'Pensacola' had only recently moved in to the area. The Pensacola are said to have been closely related to the Chatot people, who lived in the Fort Walton culture area, and 'Panzacola' or 'Pansacola' was a common surname among the Apalachee. -- Donald Albury 10:44, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

I briefly mentioned that in the article, that the Pensacola people (as opposed to the Pensacola culture peoples, lol) were associated with the Fort Walton Apalachee people and were relative newcomers to the western panhandle area. I am only half way through my book on Bottle Creek, but will be expanding on the prehistory of the site, connections to Moundville, South Louisiana, and Plaquemine peoples. Also need to work in the 1702 visit by Bienville to the Bottle Creek site to get statues to send back to the King of France, lol. From the book so far, which is only 7? 8 years old, it seems they are not really sure who the historic tribes associated with the Pensacola culture are yet. Brown seems to hint that he thinks it may have been the Mabilians or a related group, which I mentioned, but nothing in the book yet has popped up. The next chapter I'm getting ready to read is about the prehistory of the site and the Pensacola culture, so hoping to flesh it out a little more once I get through it. As for more stuff showing up online lately, I've noticed a big jump in the availability of thesis papers, old journals with online versions, etc. I'm not sure if there is just a lot of new stuff up, or google got better or if my google-fu got better, haha, but I've been finding a lot of helpful stuff lately. I rebuilt almost the entire Lake Jackson Mounds article with 3 or 4 online journal articles and thesis papers from the last 10 yrs, that I swear weren't available a year or two ago. Heiro 11:08, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, nice! Thanks for the article! I really enjoyed reading it. I've been to the Bottle Creek site once, but the article taught me some things I didn't know or misunderstood. And your graphics are awesome as always. Thanks again! Altairisfar (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Heiro 17:26, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

And then we have the "Pensacola Indians", Apalachees and Yemassees living around Pensacola at the end of the First Spanish era. The names given to cultures sometimes turn out to be a bit awkward. There has to be material used to establish the significance of all those NRHP sites, but digging it out can be tough. I also get frustrated trying to find out more about sites that get off-hand comments in books and journal articles. Authors often assume a familiarity with the literature that I don't have. On the one hand, besides the books I've bought and haven't finished readinf, I already have more on-line books and articles bookmarked than I'll be able use for quite a while, and on the other hand, I'm constantly seeing mention of things that I want to know more about. -- Donald Albury 11:12, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree with everything you just said, haha. Heiro 15:12, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Wulfing cache

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Etowah plates

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 16:06, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Awministries

Thank you so much for your assistance, will review information and attempt again. Awministries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awministries (talk • contribs) 03:34, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

94.175.118.39

You warned 94.175.118.39 (talk · contribs) = this is also WarriorsPride6565 (talk · contribs) (openly, he used the IP to post to my talk page but signed with his account name). Those new articles are very impressive, as is your art work (found your website also). Dougweller (talk) 06:16, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Mississippian copper plates

Carabinieri (talk) 08:04, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Cantonese people (IP/WarriorsPride)

Over the past couple of days I've been trying to handle some very problematic edits made by 94.175.118.39 (talk · contribs) at Cantonese people - these variously involve lots of OR (including admissions that the sources don't say what the editor is claiming them to say: [2], [3] ), blatantly unreliable sources (message boards and, amazingly, a term-paper cheat site), other sloppy sourcing and redundancy problems, and copyvio. Attempts to discuss this on Talk have been met with serious IDHT. Similar troublesome edits have now been made at Miscegenation, Interracial marriage, and Eurasian (mixed ancestry). I see that you've had/have experience with this editor, so I was wondering if you had any advice or could provide extra eyes on the articles (not that I'm trying to stick you with work, but I can feel the "losing my cool" monster starting to fight against its bonds). Thanks. Ergative rlt (talk) 23:02, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Comment

If you have issue with anything I do, please feel free to ask me about it. Thank you.--William S. Saturn (talk) 00:33, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, was just trying not to start drama, as there is enough connected with that article as it is. I noticed your attempts to contact the editors by email and decided to ask an admin I know is acquainted with the problems on that page what their take on it was. He din't seem to think it was anything to worry about, so I forgot about it. Didn't mean to cause offense if any was taken, just hadn't ran across you much and was curious. Regards, Heiro 00:46, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I contacted all parties that I saw as heavily involved including Dougweller.--William S. Saturn (talk) 01:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Melungeon

This a formal "Cease and desist" letter to you informing you to STOP contributing to racism and malious attacks on my family, the melungeons. Further contrubutions to this wil indicate a delibrite attempt to further racism and malious embarsement on my family the melungeons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.68.123 (talk) 19:40, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Good lord, who taught you to spell? Heiro 20:41, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Louisiana Editing

Heiro, I apologize about changing the ERA from BCE to BC and from CE to AD. I just wanted to remain consistent in applying BCE/BC and CE/AD. I was looking at other states pages and the ones I looked at either don't have BCE nor CE. Again that is no excuse and I want to apologize again. User talk:Sullivan9211 14:32, 7 July 2012 (CST)

Heiro has a problem with neutrality. Heiro is not confortable with any notions with laenings to other religions than Heiro's. If one article should have just one date system, why YOU have deleted all edits wich unified all dates to majority in that article in the case of BC/AD, but let all the edits with BCE and BC? Sorry, but Heiro has a double standard... and a big problem to climb over in the field of scientific thinking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.157.92.31 (talk) 12:06, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

IP has a problem with Neutral Point of View and seems quite happy to attack you, Heiro, at Talk:History of Ptolemaic Egypt although you haven't edited that article. Lol. Dougweller (talk) 12:21, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Given their insistence that they are running a "scientific test", yet their clear lack of a clue where the English languange is concerned, I think we are being trolled. If their disruption continues, would you block or do you consider yourself involved by now? If so I'll take to the appropriate admin board if I notice it, but I'm not on WP much right now. It is the middle of my "on the road" season for work and I'm pretty busy IRL. Heiro 17:25, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think I'm too involved. I did restore their edit at History of Ptolemaic Egypt which was always BC, by the way. Dougweller (talk) 18:20, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Randi GA nomination

I have started a GA review of an article to which you have recently contributed. Any help in addressing the concerns raised in the review are welcome.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 18:11, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I started looking

into Frank Joseph to see just how reliable he might be as a source, and then decided there might as well be an article about him and then discovered that the redirect at Frank Joseph WAS HIM. This is a link [4] that pulls some of it together. I have not read the whole thing but thought that I'd pass it on to you. I do think that accepting him as a reliable source will get wikipedia into some strange places. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 02:18, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Digging a bit deeper I see that you are way ahead of me. I'll suggest that perhaps an administrator should be alerted about this guy. I assume not a woman. Carptrash (talk) 02:30, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, done and done, lol. I ran across "Frank" several months ago while researching another fringe issue addition for something, no longer remember what now. The editor inserting the material was good enough at citations, etc.(especially for someone with 3 edits) that if I hadn't recognized the name I probably would have left them alone, as I barely skimmed over the content. But after noticing who he was citing too, I actually read what was being added to the article. To call that stuff WP:FRINGE is kind, most of it is out right BS. Heiro 12:50, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Kincaid Mounds State Historic Site

Before reverting my change again, please note that the change is in accordance with the Wikipedia Manual of Style (MoS). Please read the talk page. Thanks. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 20:38, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Heironymous Rowe. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 20:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I'm no good at range blocks anyway, so you'll need someone else, maybe the Admin from User talk:166.147.112.7? Off to bed now. Dougweller (talk) 20:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Right on. If he continues I'll re-open or start a new section linking to the one from a month ago and ask for a rangeblock. With that other thread as prior evidence it should not be too hard to obtain. Heiro 20:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

that ip must have nailed it to get you all roweled up like you did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.147.120.18 (talk) 23:36, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

No, the fact that you keep showing up after all these years to pull these shenanigans is irritating. Take your debunked hoaxes, ufos, mayan prophecies, and ancient european americans and go elsewhere. And knock it off with the personal attacks. Heiro 00:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I have noticed from your above statement "ancient european americans" and your reverts on various wikipedia pages that include european/native american you appear to have a hate for any native americans with european ancestry. After checking out numerous comments you have left and the numerous reverts on wikipeida pages including mine you appear to have a mission to keep native american with european ancestry off wikipedia pages. If not then please explaine why you make these statements and actions. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.8.174.113 (talk • contribs)

This has nothiung to do with a bias against Native Americans with European descent, it has everything to do with WP:OR, WP:RELIABLE and adding pseudoscientific nonsense into articles. Please go to the article talk page. Heiro 15:12, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Ancient european americans is discussed by the discovery channel, history channel, pbs, discovery magazine, all the archiology sites, etc etc. It is called the soultrean theory which is same as siberian theory. It is based after the fact that ancient skulls like the florida bog mummies and kenniwick man among others was found to be caucasoid. There is also the X2 haplogroup findings. etc etc. It is a well discussed theory with scientific backing. So that does not give you a right to use the wikipeida site as your own play ground to keep people from speaking of this. It also does not warrent your words that you have used on other wikipedia users. Becaue of your actions you are in a discussion page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.8.174.113 (talk) 15:27, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Grog

What is grog? I've found a source speaking of Illinois' Duffy Site (Late Woodland with Mississippian influences) and related sites as yielding "grog-tempered" pottery, and I find a reference to the same technique in your Coles Creek culture article. Nyttend (talk) 17:43, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I checked grog, figuring that it would be about the beverage but hoping otherwise, and I completely forgot to check the hatnoted disambiguation page. I've run into the concept of tempering before, when I was writing about the Ashworth Site in Indiana's southwestern corner (quite close to Duffy, actually), but that site is Caborn-Welborn. Nyttend (talk) 01:10, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Also related to Duffy — are you familiar with the Great Salt Spring, a few miles away? Also known as "Saline Springs" (the name by which it's on the National Register) or Nigger Springs (due to it being the site of the only legal slavery in Illinois), it was a major trade center from the Woodland period into historical times. You can read somewhat about it at Crenshaw House (Gallatin County, Illinois), and if you have JSTOR access, you can read about it here, here, here, and here. I'm asking precisely because of the multitude of names — because it's a regionally prominent site and because it's had so many names, I'm left wondering if it might have an article that I've not yet found. Nyttend (talk) 01:43, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to keep piling on questions; I keep thinking of something else. I've just written Spanish Fort Site (Holly Bluff, Mississippi), which despite its name has nothing to do with the Spanish, but it does have Baytown and Coles Creek components. Does it belong on their templates? I don't do much with navboxes for individual cultures, so I'd appreciate it if you added (or chose not to add) these sites to their templates after you get a chance to respond to my Salt Spring question. Nyttend (talk) 03:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, dont know anything about the Salt Spring, but do know a bit about the Spanish Fort, it should be one of two or three in the immediate Yazoo Basin area and should prolly be in the templates. I know one of my book by Philips has several pages on the sites, including site maps, but I am on the road for the summer and the earliest I'll be home is 3 weeks from now. May be able to expand it. Will take a look. See also Holly Bluff Site. Heiro 03:55, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! One of the entries in the bibliography for my main Spanish Fort source is

Phillips, Philip. Archaeological Survey in the Lower Yazoo Basin, Mississippi, 1949-1955. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 25. Cambridge: Harvard U, 1970.

Sound familiar, or is this something different? I know that this region is much more familiar to you than where I am; I decided to write about it after looking through several years of the Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology (which just got added to JSTOR, as far as I can tell) and running across an article that covered this and two other sites in the immediate Yazoo Basin area. My article links two comparable ones, Leist and Little Spanish Fort, which may be what you're remembering. And thanks for the input on the Salt Spring, too. Nyttend (talk) 04:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Thats gthe Philips book I have, bit ole sucker, must be 2.25" thick, lol. And Little Spanish Fort is what I am remembering. There are also several other sites around the southeast with that particular name also, lol. De Soto sure spread it around, at least gossip wise amongst the white colonizers several hundred years later. He apparently slept in more places that G. Washington. Heiro 04:13, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Angel and Caborn-Welborn

Do you have any need for an information source on either Angel or Caborn-Welborn? I've just checked out this guy's dissertation from the Indiana University library; I wanted it as a resource for writing about the Ellerbusch Site (near Angel), but he has massive amounts of information on both A and C-W. It's seemingly one of the earliest publications on C-W, as one of his earlier publications (cowritten with IU faculty member Cheryl Ann Munson) defined the culture in the first place. Nyttend (talk) 01:58, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Another question — have you ever heard of a tool called a shredder? This dissertation speaks of finding such a tool and describes it as being a tool similar to a scraper, but used for tearing insted of scraping. Shredder redirects to shredding, which doesn't mention anything on the subject, and shredder (archaeology) is a redlink to which no page links. Nyttend (talk) 22:57, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Nope, sorry. Sure there is an archeo text book somewhere, mebbe ask Dougweller? Heiro 04:13, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 19:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Hola

Any thoughts? -Uyvsdi (talk) 21:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Prather Site

FYI — I'm planning on visiting metro Louisville tomorrow, and the Prather Site is on my photo list. Nyttend (talk) 00:16, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Awesome! Keep meaning to myself, but is just far enough off my beaten path I haven't yet! You should make a folder at commons and upload as many good pics as you can get. Not sure if much is there though. Seems to be mostly a field with some gentle rises frm google and the few shots in some archaeo reports. Heiro 05:16, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the scene came out as rather bland fields; the countryside that I saw was comparable to what you see in File:Deffenbaugh Site.jpg. I was counting on seeing at least the remnants of substantial mounds; a week and a half ago, I saw the Common Field Site near Ste. Genevieve, Missouri (37°57′16″N 90°0′43″W), and even though it's damaged enough that it was only recently identified as Mississippian, it still has a large mound that you can see distantly from the state highway and easily see from the nearby gravel road. I'll try to remember to let you know when I get that uploaded; I'm busy enough with school and work right now that I've not yet uploaded some photos from July, and recent trips to Ste. Genevieve and Louisville have compounded the backlog :-) Perhaps things at Prather would have been different if I could have seen the area near the state highway, but one's view of the site is obstructed by both a rail line and a treeline, so you'll have to settle for a photo taken from the Charlestown Pike on the site's northern side. Nyttend (talk) 03:10, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Cool, right on. I suspected as much as I mentioned above. It doesn't sound like it was a very large site with very large mounds to begin with, but a century of cultivation and digging, not to mention several previous centuries of erosion and neglect, have surely rubbed them down to nubs. You should really stop at Angel if you are ever in the Evansville area if you want to see some substantial mounds. I haven't been very active here (wiki) all summer either, I was busy working painting several large mural projects and working on new oil paintings for several gallery shows I have coming up in the next year. Part of the reason I haven't been very good about answering stuff on this page this summer. I just got home from a 3 month work trip this weekend and am now back in my studio, so don't know when I'll get back to being active here. I still have several subjects I want to finish up articles about, one a rather large article on Mississippian shell engravings I've been slowing building for 2 years, similar to the ones I did on pottery and repousse copper. But last spring a spat and mutual edit war with an IP vandal that led to a 24 hr block for me and an apology from the blocking admin to the IP kinda soured me a little and the 3 month break has actually let me realize how much IRL work I used to get done before I started spending so much time on here. I still pop in from time to time to check my watchlist, do the occasional vandal revert or minor correction, but have no definite plans for anything else right now. I'm sure something will pique my interest in the coming months though. Keep up the good work and definitely drop me a line when you upload those photos, the Missouri sites as well, would love to see them. Cheers, Heiro 04:05, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm guessing that what survives at Common Field is comparable in size to the Seip Mound in Ross County, Ohio, but its distance from the road means that I can't be sure; you can read more about it at http://www.jstor.org/stable/25800573 if you have JSTOR access. I got another site in Ste. Genevieve County (Kreilich, just some open fields; not Mississippian), plus several in Randolph County on the Illinois side. Unfortunately, most of them aren't impressive: there's a historic village site and several petroglyph sites (but some of the carvings are badly vandalised, and the rest are horribly hard to see; I only found them because I had a copy of the book in which they were first published a few years ago), but one is the massive Modoc Rock Shelter. Meanwhile, I visited Angel more than a year ago (I've gotten every single National Register site in Indiana southwest of Indianapolis :-) and enjoyed it, but I didn't get many photos, and what I did get were inferior to what was already online. I've never seen any other site even close to its complexity; the only bigger earthworks of any sort that I've seen are Newark, plus the Grave Creek and Miamisburg Mounds. I've seen documentation on Prather that you don't have, but I don't remember the URLs — I found a large number of documents related to Clark County archaeological sites (many of the documents were the basic archaeological survey forms), but while I recorded the URLs, I forgot to list what URL went with what site, so I'll have a good deal of re-digging to do before I can find it. Nyttend (talk) 04:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Photo added. I'm sorry for the poor quality, but between the time of day and the drivers behind me who didn't want to stop randomly along the road, I couldn't get anything better. Nyttend (talk) 01:18, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Not disagreeing with your edit, but I note that Talamachusee did add Richart Thornton's name to Thornton (surname) (it was removed of course). Taking a short break now. Dougweller (talk) 05:57, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Pretty sure the IP is correct about Talamachusee is Thornton, but the IP was a bit disengenious with their edit summary as the links they changed at Kenimer site were not added by Talamachuse nor did they concern Thornton. I suspect the IP might be another alias. Enjoy your break, Heiro 16:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Location marker options in Template:Infobox_Pre-Columbian_site

Hi Hei- I was trying to figure out how to make a more visible marker for the Chaco Canyon/Pueblo Bonito site on the New Mexico map in the infobox on Pueblo_Bonito, and saw that you'd added the box there last year. Are you familiar with how to change the location marker in those maps? I see some guidance on Template:Location_map#Caption.2C_label_size.2C_background.2C_mark.2C_marksize, but the arguments are different in that template from the ones available in Template:Infobox_Pre-Columbian_site. Thanks in advance for any pointers. I'll watch on the Pueblo Bonito talkpage if you think it's better to answer me there. Eric ^talk 16:42, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

First Catholic Mass in the United States was not Pensacola

I don't wish to quarrel with you and I won't go behind you to "re-edit" but please read the following.

Dominican friars Fr. Antonio de Montesinos and Fr. Anthony de Cervantes were among the San Miguel de Gualdape colonists. Given that at the time priests were obliged to say mass each day, it is historically safe to assert that mass was celebrated in what is today the United States for the first time, by these Dominicans, even though the specific location and date of the event remains unclear. This is from the Catholic Encyclopedia.

...and following the same assertion, the first Catholic Mass in Florida occurred in the Narvaez expedition the following year (1528). These are both 30 plus years before Tristan de Luna colonization attempt in Pensacola. Please enlarge and read the text of the historic marker in this photo, which was placed at the Jungle Prada Site by the Diocese of St. Petersburg over two years ago.

1st Mass in Florida marker

...regarding Fr Suarez's appointment as bishop-elect, and the 14 total priests on the Narvaez voyage, I'm still searching for an easily linkable resource to verify it for you. i've read it several times over the years (including an actual translation of Charles V's Feb 1528 letter to him) in books, but never bothered to scroll down the pub info.

...if you want to get technical, since Puerto Rico is part of the US, there had long been settlements on the island with Catholic churches there since Columbus's time, well before ANY of these locations.

As I said, not looking for a quarrel, just want you to know that I wasn't pulling stuff out of thin air. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creativewill (talk • contribs) 17:39, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

All you have to do is add citations when you edit articles and add new information. Heiro 18:19, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for your email. I too am not sure there's anything that can be done about it, but you were right to call attention to it. I will try to keep a look out from time to time, but please do feel welcome to contact me again if there is anything you think needs specific action. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:35, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I have now sent you an email. Please do feel welcome to contact me again if you get more from the same person, or from another one of the same lot. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:40, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Jehiel R. Elyachar

Please refer to my note [5] at Talk:Jehiel R. Elyachar. Would you consider self-reverting your edit [6] while we discuss there? I think the removal is reasonable per WP:UNDUE. Thanks, JoeSperrazza (talk) 20:31, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

replied at article talk page. Heiro 01:55, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Eyes needed

Could use some eyes on Australian Christian Lobby, where, like with the article on the American Third Position Party, schills have been trying to portray the movement as they describe themselves. The movement is an over-the-top extreme-right "Christian" organization that is rabidly anti-gay to the point where even other conservative Christian groups in Australia have distanced themselves from it. Would appreciate it if you could add it to your watchlist. Thanks! Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 03:29, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

The Witherspoon Institute article as it is now presents an extemely one-sided view of a highly controversial and debatable issue and needs to be more balanced. It also contains incorrect statements. The Regnerus study, for example, did not "fail" an audit. Rather, the review process and the article itself were heavily criticized by a member of the editorial board. It was not possible to "fail" or "pass." The author of the article was also absolved of all wrongdoing by an inquiry conducted by a professional in academic ethics at UT Austin. The Wilcox involvement continues to be a matter of controversy. Controversies should be presented without taking sides. If you think my edits do not meet their goal of achieving neutrality, please re-work them. Thanks, Egoldstein84 (talk) 00:58, 29 October 2012 (UTC)egoldstein84

Discuss at article talk page please, as has been pointed out to you. Heiro 01:00, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Dory Funk Jr

Good Grief

You keep removing information that is clearly referenced by 3 major wrestling news sites yardbarker.com, wrestlingtruth.com and wrestlingnewsworld.com and only 1 other reference is a blog! We need to resolve this as i feel you should not keep deleting information that is referenced! oldschoolwrasslinoldschoolwrasslin 11:00, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

He has been doing this to other people's edits also, completely over looking approved sources just because 1 is a blog and then removing the entire edit due to one reference out of 4-20 being a blog....even if the blog is chopped full of references on it's own. I checked your 3 sites you listed above and they would be acceptable for references also. I seen no reason for your edits to have been removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.8.172.103 (talk) 08:45, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

And I removed your edit because you are edit warring to keep in sources which include blogs, forums, etc, some of which don't even mention the subject of the article. Dougweller (talk) 09:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that Doug. As for you other two, please just go read up on the policies I linked for you when I removed your respective material and please do start discussions at WP:RSN if you really do feel you sources should pass WP:RELIABLE. Maybe a majority of other editors would disagree with me, but I doubt it. Heiro 15:01, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Foreign Influence on US Presidential Election, 2012

The Foreign Influence on US Presidential Elections page is currently under construction, please allow me to finish before DELETING my work. (Corinne.L.Clark (talk) 05:11, 15 November 2012 (UTC))

Adher to our policies on WP:NPOV, WP:CITE and WP:NOR and stop pushing a political opinion by WP:SYNTHing and WP:COATRACKing nonsense together and the editors here(not just me) will stop removing "your work". Heiro 05:17, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Melungeon sources

Please take this to the section I started at the article talkpage, Talk:Melungeon#Sourcing problem. Heiro 07:31, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Reported

As per wikipedia rules I have to inform you that you have been reported for harassment and profanity to wikipedia users (who pay their own money to wikipedia thru contrabutions to keep wikipedia running). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.8.167.38 (talk) 07:51, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Harassment? No, requesting adequate sourcing is not harassment, it is part of policy. Profanity? Not against the rules here. Also, Wikipedia users do not pay to edit here. Now, take this to the damn article talkpage and see the list of reasons why your sources are inadequate. :-) Heiro 08:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Huh, I missed the whole thing, didn't notice the post to my talk page. Seems satisfactorily sorted. :-) Dougweller (talk) 13:59, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Lol, mostly. The IP seems to be convinced we are part of some evil cabal to keep "accurate" information about "us"(Melungeons) off wikipedia. A serious case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and I'm starting to think maybe some WP:COMPETENCE issues. Their block expires next week, I expect them to return. In the last several months of dealing with them I've repeatedly asked for reliable sources, but from here on out I'm just taking them to the admin boards and asking for blocks. One can only WP:AGF for so long. Heiro 16:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Horseshoe mounds

Perhaps you saw my photo of the Horseshoe Mound in Portsmouth. I'd never heard anything about other horseshoe-shaped mounds until now, when I discovered a mention of such a mound near the Ohio River in Meigs County, Ohio — The Pioneer History of Meigs County, page 161. Do you know of any scholarship that specifically concentrates on mounds of this shape? Nyttend (talk) 03:33, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Nope, far as I knew the double horseshoe in Portsmouth was unique(there used to be 2). Cool, interested to see what you turn up. Heiro 03:36, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, there appear to have been a few others. This article has an image of one located near Galena, Illinois; it is mentioned on page 115 of this document, if you have access to it. From the description at the owner's website, however, I'm wondering if it might be a natural hill. An article in a 1952 issue of American Antiquity speaks of "a survey of the Horseshoe mound" being one of several archaeological projects near Tallahassee, Florida. Besides that, I'm finding nothing solid; the other results are stories of fanciful creatures or people coöpting the mound for political purposes. Nyttend (talk) 04:10, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

LOL, just over the hill... and the next.... and the next.. and the next, 20 some miles away. And I believe the majority of that one, if not all of it, is a WPA reconstruction after it was completely excavated. Heiro 04:20, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, didn't know that it had been excavated. Until I looked at the image and recognized the same scene that I visited a month ago, I'd guessed that they were confused; I was expecting to see a claim that there was some sort of horseshoe shape at the Scioto Township Works or the Piketon Mounds, both of which are on the National Register of Historic Places listings in Pike County, Ohio, and both of which are just a few miles from this enrichment plant. Nyttend (talk) 04:26, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Have never found any sourcing for it, but growing up there I heard about it. If I ever find anything reliable and in print I will add it to article. Wish there were old images of the other mounds now disappeared from that group. If you look at Squier and Davis, you can see all the circles and enclosures that are now gone and covered by neighborhoods :-( Heiro 04:30, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Is everything else gone? I figured that some of the other long, low hills in the same park (particularly east of the mound, just north of the playground) were artificial. Nyttend (talk) 04:54, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I think that may be the natural elevation noted in S and D, have never been sure. Parts still exist to the west in the oldest part of Greenlawn Cemetary and the avenues leading to river (not in this illus) still exist as slight rises and bumps in the streets of the oldest parts of town, if you know where to look. But generally, the one horseshoe is all that remains. Heiro 05:05, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Not much time for searching, but a quick JSTOR check only found two articles with the <"portsmouth earthworks"> string; one was an American Antiquity article mentioning excavations at the Biggs Site, and the other was from a journal of British studies talking about fortifications at Portsmouth, Hampshire. Nyttend (talk) 05:06, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I've never really found much that I haven't already included. Heiro 05:08, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

[edit conflict, meant to add this to my previous comment] I got a couple of photos at Greenlawn (one was just the chapel), and the only non-flat thing that I photographed or can remember was the miniature rise on which they set the Civil War soldier statue. I would have gotten more photos that day, but I was shorter on time than I hoped; that's why I didn't get any photos for the Scioto Township Works, Feuert, or Tremper. Nyttend (talk) 05:06, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Feurt I think is on private land, not sure. Tremper, meh, not much to look at, just a low rise on side of road, got the best I could and added it. It is also privately owned. Not sure about STW, tho. Your photo of Greenlawn, not oldest section, oldest section is in southeast corner, easy to pick out, lots of bumps, much higher than rest of street level. Heiro 05:17, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Hm, okay. I'd only once been to Scioto County before (as a child, going on US 23 from North Carolina to home northwest of Columbus) and know almost nothing about Portsmouth's history. I'd hoped to get STW from 23, and Feurt from the little industrial service road just off 23; Tremper was annoying, because I was looking for the sign that's in your picture, and either it's gone or I overlooked it. I was confused by the part of Greenlawn that I photographed — is this just a local veterans' cemetery, or is it akin to a United States national cemetery? Nyttend (talk) 05:43, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that sign is only about 10" x 15", lol. As for Greenlawn, it has a large civil war section, but is not exclusively a vets cemetery. (Ohio sent a lot of people to fight) The oldest section is in the far southeastern corner with the diagonal street. Majority of the graves in that section are pre-Civil War. Not sure if it is oldest cemetery in town, but that section would be close. Is marked as cemetery in S and D, which is 1846. Town was founded in 1803. Heiro 05:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to keep piling on the orange notices...I'd not previously looked too closely at the S&D map that you've added here (I didn't notice the gallery at the P Earthworks article), and I'd not read the article carefully, so I didn't realise that there were two horseshoes. Do we know which of the two mounds still exists? And also, how many inches wide is the original drawing? I'm trying to find any traces of the Natural Elevation on topo maps, but either S&D exaggerated its height or it's been graded down, and it might help if I could make use of the "300 ft to the Inch" scale. Nyttend (talk) 12:48, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Thant's cool. I'm not exactly sure what the scale is. I have a reproduction issue of S and D I bought at the Serpent Mound gift shop 10 yrs ago, but have never been sure if the scale on it is the same as an original. I can look later when at my studio for my original scan(apparently not on my laptop and I'm at home right now without access to my ext harddrive). I did just do a quick overlay in photoshop showing the approximate line up of S and D with a google screenshop. Email me and I can attach it to an email it to you. The remaining horseshoe is the right hand one. S and D "bluffs" and terraces are usually exaggerated and not useful for determining height, but they are generally in the correct position. Heiro 13:52, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Gerard van Honthorst

I notice you've reverted my removal of the picture infobox from the page (along with my other edits). The reason I removed it was because it was a picture infobox, and thus surely only applicable to a page about a specific painting. There is however no reason why this painting, rather than any other on the page should have an infobox. If there was an infobox on the page it would be an artist infobox, though I can't see it would would be really necessary and would make layout more difficult.

Hope this has clarified my motivatio.nRuskinmonkey (talk) 11:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Marietta Earthworks

You should have asked two months ago; I passed through Marietta and got several non-earthwork photos (e.g. W.P. Snyder) on the day before I visited Portsmouth. Besides the Conus, I only have two photos: File:Miniature mound in Mound Cemetery.jpg, which I suppose you already saw (do you think this is prehistoric, or perhaps just something that was created after the death of the person whose gravestone it is?), and one that's not online that shows the ditch around the Conus. My best suggestion is to use this CC-by image, or to ask the uploader of this CC-by-nd image to permit derivative works. Nyttend (talk) 21:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

See File:Ditch around Conus Mound in Marietta.jpg if you think it might be useful. I just noticed that I promised you a Mississippian image from Missouri back in September (section "Prather Site" on this talk page); you can find it at File:Common Field Archaeological Site platform mound.jpg. Nyttend (talk) 22:06, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Also see {{Did you know nominations/Marietta Earthworks}}; I hope this is the hook you were meaning. Nyttend (talk) 22:30, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for that, that's the hook I was talking about, thought you might appreciate it. I saw the one photo of mini-mound, doubt it is prehistoric, lol. Added the ditch and berm photo to article though. Hadn't really thought of this article in awhile, just happened on it again the other day(bad mix of hodgepodge, inaccuracies, no good references for an archaeological site article, etc.) and decided to fix it like I had been wanting to for awhile, wish I had thought of it over summer when you were doing your photo tour. Meh, someone ( you, me, someone) will get pics of the other remaining stuff there someday, no deadline right? Happened to have picked up a few books over the last few years about the Hopewell and after a look decided I had enough to create the article. As for Common Field Archaeological Site, if I ever run across any info on it, I'll create the article. Having a pic ready to go is a big help. Cheers, Heiro 02:21, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Special:Emailuser/Nyttend and I can send you a copy of the article about Common Field that I linked in my comment at 04:53 on 18 September. It's not amazingly detailed, but it cites multiple sources on Common Field; at least one of them, published in World Archaeology in 1982, I can access and thus know that it has plenty of detailed information on Common Field. Nyttend (talk) 02:35, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Marietta Earthworks

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Cole culture

Do you have any sources that discuss the Cole culture at all? I'm trying to find information on the type site, the W.S. Cole Site, which is slightly north of Delaware, OH. At this point, I'm not getting much except from this book, which says that it's 0.6km north of Ufferman — but I don't have a solid location for Ufferman either. Most of the sources that discuss it seem to be grey literature that only get mentioned by http://core.tdar.org. Nyttend (talk) 12:29, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Have still never ran across any information on the Cole culture. Sorry. Heiro 01:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Oops, I completely forgot that I'd asked you before; I now remember the "Cole culture?" section in your February-September 2010 archive, but only because you said "still" in this answer. Sorry...Nyttend (talk) 05:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

American Third Position Party

Could you keep an eye on the editing of Ngfan1 on this article? I'm going to withdraw for obvious reasons. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:22, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

..

Seasons greetings to you and yours
Dougweller (talk) 14:02, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Cherokee Moons Ceremonies

The calendar is gone, but this one needs a lot of work and a new title. Dougweller (talk) 18:46, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Cahokia

Really? You have nothing better to do than to revert minor edits of new users who are trying to help improve things and update years old templates. It appears from your edit history that you spend alot of your time reverting others edits. This is exactly why I haven't been on here in the past - bickering users who want revert and re-revert and argue and demand that other users justify every tiny change to them or they revert even minor and superficial changes again and again.

Don't bother replying here or on my talk page. I won't be on here anymore. Kjkjl555 (talk) 07:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Sandbox edits

I just added some states to the table in your sandbox. Do you want to move it over to the article? -- Donald Albury 12:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Sent you an email

Haven't heard from you in a while. Dougweller (talk) 21:55, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Stay the Fuck out of this Ping Pong. If I want information of Mushu Shrimp, I will ask you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berzerker1982 (talk • contribs)

One more racist comment out of you(you seem to think I'm Asian, how dumb are you? I'm not) and I ask for a block. Go read WP:NPA. Heiro 21:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

That's over 4RR now, Wiki too slow for me at the moment and I'm about to be busy, if he reverts you time to report him as I warned him before he replaced the Bauval stuff about 3RR. Dougweller (talk) 19:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Righto, will check back later and see if they have. Heiro 19:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

They did. So I took to 3RR board. Logging off for awhile now, RL to attend too. Will check back in later sometime. Heiro 19:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 21:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Need help with the Wikipedia process of verifying a resource and adding a citation

Dear Heironymous Rowe, It seems that we have been knocking our head together and I have been angry about the deletion of my content and knowing how to write citations and verifying our tribal information and follow the Wikipedia policy process of adding information to the Wikipedia Taino People page and the section under Tainos In Modern Times. As you seem to be a pro in this writing area, I would like to get your personal help as I have no idea as to how to add these citations and what documents are need to verify provide valid proof and documentation as to our Jatibonicu Taino Tribal Nation of Boriken (1970). Can you help me in this process via email correspondence as I would be able to provide all the Jatibonicu Taino Tribal Nation historical documentation?

PS; Sorry about the misunderstanding as to the removal policy as to our tribal name and our information verification.

Attentively yours, Juan A. Perez, JTTNB Site Network Administrator Internet email address: japerez@taino-tribe.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by Japerez (talk • contribs) 02:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Will reply at your talk page, Heiro 02:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Done. Heiro 02:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

emails

Sent you 2 Dougweller (talk) 20:32, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

? Dougweller (talk) 07:14, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, been a busy few days IRl, just had a reception for an exhibition today. Replied. Heiro 08:22, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

A "greek" charachter string in the first sentence

Please keep in mind that if you mention identifiers, such as 15GP14, then it is in good taste to mention what the character string signifies—in general. The Smithsonian trinomial probably does "no good" in the first sentence of most of our articles. I moved the identifier further into the article, together with a short description of the significance of the identifier. --The long road homw (talk) 09:59, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Hence my linking of the trinomial to the article about trinomial nomenclature. There is absolutely no need to add the definition of the trinomial system to every article that uses it. A link will suffice. And, the trimomial is not a Greek character string. Heiro 10:04, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

It was "greek" to me. That is why I introduced "Smithsonian trinomial" into the article text—a two word description. --The long road homw (talk) 10:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Mound

I have added the only reference I have, to the article. I know that the reference I have used, is not enough as a stand alone reference. Therefore I have attached a tag after the reference. I am not sure if my leg work will find the next reference. I didn't find anything on internet. If someone comes across something relevant online, then please inform me. I am not sure when I can get my hands on books which have the information i need. --The long road homw (talk) 10:47, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Find the citation first, then add the information. What if you are wrong? What if the citation when you find one says something different from what you added now? You will have left inaccurate information in an article. All material needs to be cited. And I have serious concerns about citations to plaques at sites and museums, that can not be WP:VERIFIED by users here. Heiro 10:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

What if's might have to be dealt with on a case to case basis. (I have found possible inconsistensies between a sign at the Kition-Bamboula site—and Government web pages. The Government website mentions year 1959, and the sign at the excavation site does not. I have mentioned both in the article, and cited both points of view.) That a Government sign at an excavation site claims something, is sometimes a notable fact in itself. (Even if the omission of year 1959 might be correct, or not so.) What the Government signs say in Larnaca, is verifiable. Much in the same way that information in books is verifiable. Larnaca is not very accessible to everyone, which can be compared to books which will not be shipped to a library near me. - When a sign lacks the name of who authored the text, and the year written—that in itself makes it a less-than-strong reference. For such, we need additional references. --The long road homw (talk) 11:14, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Heironymous Rowe. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 12:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dougweller (talk) 12:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Coy Site (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mounds

Hayes site (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bayou Meto

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

re: crazy reversions

You said, "same reason as the last person, work on consensus on talk page or you wont last long here"

So far no one on the talk page has offered any sensible reasoning. I've given several primary sources and academic sources, both Christian, agnostic, and atheist. In return, all the critics have had to offer is straw men allegations and double standards with nothing academic of any sort. This is appalling for a place that is supposed to be caring about objective facts. I will put my reasons in the next update though...will wait a day to see if anyone has anything actually intelligent to offer. I'm willing to change and edit things with good reasons...but fallacies are NOT good reasons..and taht is about all that has been offered so far. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dotoree (talk • contribs) 17:08, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I gave a response there as to why that source you gave does not pass muster, another editor has also chimed in. You on the other hand have refactored whole swathes of that conversation, removed bluelinks from my post where I pointed you to policies explaining why that reference was not acceptable for that claim. I warned you about messing with my statements once already. Here is a final warning, refactor one of my comments again, for any reason, and I will take this to WP:ANI and ask for sanctions. Only with another editors permission or in very extreme circumstances are you allowed to refactor another editors statements, do not repeat this behavior. Heiro 18:02, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Smithsonian trinomials

"The numbers mean nothing to someone not familiar with articles about archaeology", I have written in the Hansen Site article. The third "word" of an article should probably not be a group of numbers/characters which means nothing—to a majority (or minority) of readers here. It is probably not good enough for a general encyclopedia, that the third "word" of an article must be clicked (so that one understands if it is important or not—for one's understanding of the rest of the text).

I am thinking about translating the article about the Hansen Site to German. If I have any questions about that, then i will ask on the article's talk page.

Thank you for your help with the programming of references for the article about the city-kingdom of Kition. --The long road homw (talk) 21:04, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome for the help, but I warned you about continuing to edit war at Hansen Site. I've made a 3RR report [7]. Heiro 21:12, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

This was such a bizzare situation; I've never seen someone complain about mentioning a trinomial. I asked Bbb23 for permission to unprotect, since TLRH was the only disruptive one and you weren't causing any problems; he agreed, so I've unprotected it. Nyttend (talk) 00:26, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it best to have the discussion either on the talk page of a user who's been gone for some weeks or on the article talk page; perhaps Wikiproject Archaeology? I was always slightly nervous about including them after the site name without explanation (see what I did at Zimmerman Kame), but since we finally have an article about them, a link is definitely sufficient. My experience is the same as yours — as I see them used everywhere, either directly following the site name or instead of the site name. A style that works for the professionals should work for us, so I see no reason to stop using them in introductions like the professionals do; if nothing else, it helps readers become accustomed to their use, and it means that they'll be less confused if they read professional literature. As I see it, either we use them like we are, or we omit them entirely, and if we omit them, readers are going to take a while to figure out how they work; I only learned through a long process of guessing, which culminated in a question to User:Billwhittaker, but not everyone gets a chance to ask a professional on-wiki. Nyttend (talk) 01:33, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I too tried to write an article but was unable to find sufficient sourcing. Hopefully we won't have too many people complaining that we're writing like the professionals do; my GA nomination of Ellerbusch Site in southwestern Indiana failed because the reviewer kept complaining about elements that were patterned after the dissertation and the book (by the two people who defined its culture!) that I was using as the main sources. Winter hasn't been too horrible; yesterday and today have been nice, and I've seen numerous undergrads jogging around campus with nothing on more than T-shirt and shorts. Too cold for me to do that, but I've happily left off my jacket. Still, I'm hoping for spring to come before long; I'm planning to make a trip to the Kincaid Site and Cairo, IL before I graduate at the beginning of May, and (like I did when I visited Kaskaskia and the Modoc Rock Shelter in September) I'm planning on camping to save money on motel bills; I don't want to have to wear a coat while in the tent. Nyttend (talk) 01:59, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

DNA Consultants

Make sure you see my post at WP:FTN on this fringe group. Dougweller (talk) 21:48, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I replied there. Is this being used as a reference at Melungeon, the name DNAconsultants sounds familiar? If so anything reffed to this organization should be nuked ASAP. Heiro 22:13, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Previous versions

FYI - You recently made a comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Panther-Yates. Please be aware that prior to the current stubbed version, there have been alternate longer versions. Links to a few of those versions have now been included at the AfD discussion. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I had already looked at older versions of the article, anddid not see any versions that were adequately sourced to WP:RELIABLE publications, IMO. Heiro 01:39, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, just wanted to make sure. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:59, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Long Swamp Site, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Wauchope (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

User:Valkyree

User:Valkyree says the editor's here to make comments on talk pages. Dougweller (talk) 22:04, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

If all they are here to do is leave disruptive pseudoscientific NPOV pushing nonsense on talk pages, then they really aren't here to build the 'pedia and should probably be blocked as a disruption only account. Heiro 07:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Off-line

Heiro,

Sorry I missed your request. I was without Internet access at home for 2 weeks, plus having a bout of gastroenteritis. Others events are monopolizing my time right now, as well. -- Donald Albury 01:17, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about that, ugh. I think the situation got resolved. If it ever pops up again we can revisit it. Get well. Heiro 14:35, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Heironymous Rowe; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:50, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Heironymous Rowe. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 18:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dougweller (talk) 18:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Dickson Mounds

		The Original Barnstar
		Thanks for your hard work in editing a major recent change to this article. Having looked at some of your work over the years, I would hesitate to disagree with any conclusion you were to write regarding pre-1492 life in the interior of North America. Bigturtle (talk) 21:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Murphy Mound

Do you have access to the essay collection Changing Perspectives on the Archaeology of the Central Mississippi Valley, edited by O'Brien and Dunnell? I have it out from the library and have used it to expand Murphy Mound Archeological Site, but if you can look at the source, I'd appreciate it if you'd review my edit to ensure that I understood it correctly. In particular, I'd like your opinion on whether "bundle burial" should link to Funeral bundle (it's currently just about a practise found in the Peruvian Andes, but it sounds similar) and whether I understood the dates correctly, since they're at variance with the dates given by your online source. Nyttend (talk) 02:20, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Page numbers are cited in the article — you want page 314, under Table 13-1 in the chapter on prehistoric diets. Was the practise you mention substantially different from that of the Adena or Hopewell, both of whom appear to have built mounds around charnel houses, according to the sources I've cited on Dunns Pond Mound, Jackson Mound, and David Stitt Mound? All of this Mississippian stuff is new to me, since I've never visited any Mississippian mound sites except Angel, and I don't remember much about mortuary culture from the non-mound sites I've seen such as Ellerbusch, Prather, or Hovey Lake. Nyttend (talk) 03:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

No, actually pretty similar, as many Mississippian mortuary mounds and burial mounds started out as structures, but there were probably variances over the several thousand years and many cultures who employed the techniques. I believe many of the Adena and Hopewell burial mounds were built up in episodes, starting with a charnel house that is burnt and covered over, then successive layers contain many bundle burials that were stored up and then lain down in each new layer. See Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 14: Southeast edited by William Sturtevant, explains it some. Will look at the pages. Heiro 04:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! I failed to make the connection between de Soto and the 1541 date — I had no idea that it was a significant year in the region, so that's why I changed it from a precise year to "about 1550". I know that Adena sites like Williamson are thought to have been built gradually as you mention (a similar idea comes to mind for the Great Mound of Butler County, but I can't find sources immediately), so I'm not surprised. I wonder if it might be a really ancient concept; Ridgeway, the Glacial Kame type site, shows evidence of bodies being stored before burial, and I suppose I could check into whether similar burials have been found at the nearby Zimmerman and Clifford Williams sites. Nyttend (talk) 04:53, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

That's a big difference between your writing and mine — I can find the information about the sites, but I know them in isolation and don't have much awareness of the cultures themselves, let alone the theory by which they're interpreted. I guess it's just our interests, since I approach sites from a preservation perspective, with the theory and the cultural data being the reason for preservation instead of thinking of preservation primarily as a method of preventing the site from being compromised. A kind-of related question for you — as I mentioned a month ago, I'm hoping to get down to the mouth of the Ohio in April; that's why I've suddenly started looking at these sites in southeastern Missouri. Do you want photos of any specific spots around there, whether MO or IL or KY? I can't guarantee anything, but of course I can't get something if I don't know about it. Of course I know you've been to the area, since I've seen your Kincaid photo (Kincaid is one of the biggest reasons for me to visit), but I'm just asking in case you couldn't photograph something you wanted on a previous trip. Nyttend (talk) 05:46, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd already been thinking of trying for Turk and Marshall plus the NR-listed sites in McCracken and Ballard Counties, so this will be more of an incentive; I'll do my best, although Turk's/Marshall's locations away from major roads means that I'll have to get faraway photos from what seems to be a dead-end gravel road — I hope it's a road, and not just a really long driveway. The coordinates for Tolu confuse me: is it really located in town? And lastly, I know that I won't be able to get anything in Fulton County; I'd thought of going down there, but it's really too far away for the time I have. Unfortunately, I'll not be able to attend the reception; I'll be leaving Bloomington on a Friday and coming back the next day. Thanks for the invitation, though! Nyttend (talk) 13:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

One more thing — see my expansion of Campbell Archeological Site. This is the original article in which the site was published; it's a full double issue with over 100 pages on this specific site. Nyttend backup (talk) 22:31, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Chili burger

Hi. I noticed that you removed the notice from Chili burger saying that a merge discussion is underway. Removing the template before the discussion is over is a little bit presumptuous. I suggest that you wait to see how the discussion continues before preventing others from joining in the discussion. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 06:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Considering the past discussion at that page, I wouldn't get your hopes up. Seems fine as a spinoff article from a main article (Hamburger) that is already quite long, why merge content that is notable, sourced, and can stand fine on its own? The merge proposer seems to have some weird vendetta for the page creator. A few of his concerns are valid, but this one and a few of the others like the AFD of the Post-presidency of Bill Clinton are BS. Heiro 07:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The outcome last time was, in part, a result of the badgering of anyone who disagreed with him. He's using roughly the same strategy this time by dramamongering like crazy. In any case, I don't really care about the outcome so, no worries on hopes. Take it easy. :) ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 07:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Did you get my email?

Looks like someone has launched an Internet attack by setting up fake Google+ and YouTube pages, and somehow the Metapedia page on me has gotten enough links to be up at the top. Not sure what to do about that one. Dougweller (talk) 22:15, 30 March 2013 (UTC)