User talk:Andreas Philopater

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Ren Zhiqiang has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]

DYK for Ren Zhiqiang[edit]

—♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 00:08, 10 March 2016 (UTC) 00:02, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Défi[edit]

I don't suppose you could start a formal move discussion on the page? —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:42, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

I've opened a move discussion myself - could you comment? All best, —Brigade Piron (talk) 19:52, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Sorry - didn't see this at the time (was travelling on 18 July; and dealing with other issues when I did look back in). --Andreas Philopater (talk) 11:36, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Question about reversion on Peter Wright (Jesuit)[edit]

Hi there, I saw that you recently reverted an edit I made on the page Peter Wright (Jesuit) and I'd like to understand why so that I can be a better editor in the future. I deleted the category English Roman Catholic priests because he was also in the category 17th-century English Jesuits and since "Jesuits" are a subcategory of "Roman Catholic priests" (and the text doesn't mention him belonging to any other orders), I didn't see a need for him to be in the larger category. Can you clarify? Thanks, Katya (talk) 23:23, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Not all Jesuits were priests (such as Nicholas Owen (Jesuit), just to give one example), so even though "Jesuit" is currently a subcategory of "priest", not all members of the subcategory are actually members of the parent category. This is a question that I suspect has to be addressed at the level of the category tree itself. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 20:17, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Thanks for the explanation! Katya (talk) 02:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
No problem. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 18:00, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Andreas Philopater. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Andreas Philopater. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Molanus[edit]

The fact is, this is how he is usually referred to in the literature, as with Erasmus. Library catalogues and databases are actually NOT a very good determinant of the right title in this sortr of period. You should at the least have raised the matter on talk before moving it. Johnbod (talk) 10:51, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Apologies, it seemed an entirely uncontroversial move, especially as the article itself warns of potential confusion with Gerhard Wolter Molanus. Looking through the first five or six pages of hits on Google Books, I have to say that "Molanus" in a way similar to "Erasmus" appears rather less than the full name, and is largely limited to the 19th-century literature. I rather assumed its use here was a holdover from copying an out-of-copyright Britannica. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 10:59, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
That's not my experience in the art history literature - & they are really about the only people to take an interest in him today. Johnbod (talk) 11:15, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
While my experience of the art history literature is that for the past 20 years it has been typical to give his full name at first mention before reverting to surname alone, which is pretty much standard for any author referred to. The issue really is what current sources do. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 11:21, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Jews & Crypto-Jews in Antwerp[edit]

The detailed history of the Portuguese Jewish community of Antwerp appears in (Leoni, Aron di Leone. 2004. The Hebrew Portuguese nations in Antwerp and London at the time of Charles V and Henry VIII: new documents and interpretations. Jersey City, NJ: KTAV). Of course, the book is focused on Crypto-Jews, but it includes numerous documents and none mention a single Jewish given name: only the Christian ones, while if open Jews were indeed trading in Antwerp (as you suggest) it would be natural for them to trade with Crypto-Jews too. In various other studies on Jewish history in the region, not a single open Jew is recorded before the beginning of the 18th century. What is your source about Jews trading in Antwerp? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albeider (talkcontribs) 10:18, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

My understanding is based on a seminar I was at 20-odd years ago where somebody was presenting their research on Jews in Antwerp. As I said, no objection to the changes if sourced. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 21:36, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

House of van de Werve[edit]

I tried to clean this article, the family is indeed important, but we present online just some awfull articles whitout sources. Can you have a look at René-Philippe van de Werve and Fernand van de Werve: they look very poor. I have done some cleaning in this house. If i start to read Charles V Augustin van de Werve, Count of Vorsselaer, i think this is NE. if i check Augustin van de Werve, children> this is wrong. They have all been created by User talk:Hvdwds, who will clean this mess, can we ask User:Paul Brussel? Etc... --Carolus (talk) 17:19, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Carolus, I have no idea. I had not previously been aware of Paul Brussel. Looking him up I see you thanked him on his talk page, though – does that mean the desired edits have been made? --Andreas Philopater (talk) 18:52, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
No, i ask hem the same as to you. I did already some cleaning, can all please help? --Carolus (talk) 19:44, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
OK, i did some major cleaning, hopefully no mistakes, this family is really complicated!--Carolus (talk) 10:50, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
I too have done what I could. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 11:50, 16 March 2017 (UTC)