User talk:Angusmclellan/Archive 9

This is an archive of former discussions. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the active talk page.

April to August 2007

Shiny new buttons!

Hey Angus, congratulations on your adminship! You're quite right that Image:NY-blank.png is not the same as Commons:Image:NY-blank.svg, and I've removed the "now Commons" tag from it. But as far as I can tell there is no difference between Image:HongKongfilm.jpg and Commons:Image:HongKongfilm.jpg or between Image:Sulla Glyptothek.jpg and Commons:Image:Sulla Glyptothek.jpg, so go ahead and delete 'em. —Angr 14:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

A commons question...

Hello, I'm hoping you can help me out with a Commons question. I uploaded Commons:Image:Bacteroides biacutis 01.jpg using the CommonsHelper generated tagging. It looks ok to me, but apparently it's not. Any chance you can have a look at it and tell me why it is {{nsd}} tagged? It seems to be just the same as dozens of others, so if there's something I need to change I'd better get busy! Thanks in advance, Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I am not absolutely certain why but I suspect this is because of the lack of necessary "linkage" to the source of the image. If possible images should be linked to the image on the USGov website. This is to easily verify the copyright status of images in the future. I do not see any other problems.

That side, you should create a commons userpage.

-- Cat ^chi? 20:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

N Sync and N Sync members cats

Hi Angus, I don't mean to make you my go-to guy but you're the only admin I can think of off the top of my head who hasn't commented in one or the other. Can you look at closing the nominations for these two categories? They've ben open since March 29. Thanks. Otto4711 14:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I've been trailing through the left-over and incomplete nominations from March, but I'll get back to closing some CFDs (N'Sync included) today. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Ragusa

The category maritime republic is proper, as previously discussed. Don't remove whitout discussion.--Giovanni Giove 20:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

One IMAGE got lost on the way.....

Hi Angus, Would you mind reinserting the picture you obliviated with your edit here: [1]

(Regrettably I don't know what exactly needs to be done to place the other image in the same fashion as you did with the first)

Thanks and regards Pantherarosa 23:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Moralis' RfA

Hi. I've just responded to your comments on my RfA. While it's entirely up to you whether or not you'd like to respond, I'd appreciate it if you'd look over what I wrote. I realize that you most likely meant no offense, but for some reason, your approach struck a particular chord with me. Apologies if I'm reading too much into your words. --Moralis (talk) 02:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Scots, Attacotti and Deisi

Hi Angus. Sorry I have not been well enough to help you with your recent work; I hope to do so. I would like your opinion on the above short addition I made to Prehistoric settlement of Great Britain and Ireland. Cheers. Fergananim 14:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Congrats

About time. Didn't think your reasons for rejecting your two previous offers of nomination made much sense. Hope you'll stay ... partially at least ... in the medieval insular (esp. Scottish) history topic sphere ... as it has needed a working admin. As for "Margaretsons", it's a case of later historians randomly selecting a wife (not connected by lineage to the Scottish throne) to emphasize what they want to emphasize. The Margaretsons rule until the FitzErmengardes take over in 1249, they in turn being succeeded by the Meic Derborgaills and Meic Marthocs (sorry, Gaelic-pushing again, I meant Dervorguillasons and Marjoriesons), who in turn get succeeded by the Margretesøns in 1488. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

CfD

My bad for not catching the terrorist thing, sorry about that. Since you're one of the few other regular CfD closers, I was curious as to what you'd think about subpaging CfD like we do for RfA and AfD? --Hemlock Martinis 00:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Merging CfD and UCfD

I was wondering what you thought about merging CFD and UCFD again. It seems like a way to get more eyeballs and opinions on discussions. Agree? Disagree? Couldn't care less? Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I would be happy to join in on such a discussion. : ) - jc37 13:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and culture

Decided to give this a try. Check out the project page and, if it appeals to you, any contribution would be appreciated. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Marx Brothers

I nominated Category:Marx Brothers for April 19 WP:DRV. I didn't/don't see anything wrong with your good faith closure of the group nom. It was just grouped in a group nomination, and I think it should be discussed on its own merits considering that its different than the rest. - jc37 00:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Since the result was to restore (and possibly relist), would you be willing to restore the category members? - jc37 13:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't have a chance to repopulate it before it was closed as delete again, sorry. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I saw that. I don't know if it would have made a dufference in the discussion, or not.. But it's moot at this point, anyway. - jc37 18:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations...

...on your successful RfA! Dppowell 04:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Alex Schmitz

The article Alex Schmitz has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kinu ^t/_c 14:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, {{db-r2}} surely. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Ack. Not sure why NPWatcher warned you. Clearly R2 was the case and I must've deleted the original just as you were tagging it. My apologies! :P --Kinu ^t/_c 14:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

The wonders of modern technology :-) No problem at all. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

NPA

I removed your snide remark at DELREV. And for the record I am not in favour of all eponymous categories, so do not mispresent me in future. Tim! 16:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

There's only person on record as opining keep on the basis of Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories#Topic article rule Tim. Google agrees with my memory on this occasion, which is not always the case. Your views in the past concerning eponymous categories have clearly been based on a misapprehension, and may still be. It seems perfectly reasonable, and neither snide or an attack, to point out the discrepancy between your repeatedly expressed view on a question and the guidelines which inform CFD debates. Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

baelnorn

Hi, you tagged this article as In UNiverse. I've done a bunch of editing to it, mind taking a look and either commenting or dropping the template? Thanks. ThuranX 05:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Please do not act without consensus

You closed Category:Medical writers as a delete, when there isn't even a case to be made that that was a reflection of consensus. Please either stop acting without consensus, or stop closing debates altogether. Haddiscoe 16:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Castles in France

To User:Angusmclellan, User:Cool Cat, User:Jamie Mercer, User:Bluap, User:Postlebury, User:LukeHoC, User:Johnbod, User:Sam Blacketer

I'm writing to you because you contributed to the discussion on Category:Castles in France, which resulted in the category being deleted, or redirected articles in that category. This decision, as I hope to show, was wrong and needs to be reversed. Please take the time to read the following and respond.

Firstly, I should say that I did not take part in the discussion because I did not know it was taking place. (I was actually in France following the presidential election campaign and, ironically, taking photos of French castles!)

My reasons for questioning the decision are:

1. As far as I can discover, the debate was not advertised on the Wikipedia:WikiProject France page, so that editors with a declared interest in topics related to France could be aware of it.

2. Similarly, no mention was made on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Castles page.

It would have been sensible to at least mention the proposal in these projects and to seek advice.

3. The problem identified is very real. The French word château does not translate easily into English. It can mean a castle (in the usual English understanding of the word - a medieval, military defensive structure). It can mean palace/stately home/ mansion (and in fact, English speakers will frequently use the word château with that meaning). It can mean a vineyard, with or without a castle or palace attached. And, even more confusingly, the thousands of water towers in France are named château d'eau.

4. Even the French sometimes need clarification. In recent years, French language guide books have often described castles as châteaux-forts to distinguish them from the palaces.

5. Some months ago I came across a page in Wikipedia called List of castles in France (see original). This made the mistake of including article links solely because of the word château in the title; in fact only about half of the list were real castles - the rest were palaces etc and even some vineyards. I set about revising the list and along with other editors we managed to get the page as it appears now. We have gone on to add dozens more articles, particularly by translating pages from the French Wikipedia. All of these articles were categorised as Castles in France; any then categorised under Châteaux in France were moved over to Castles in France. The Châteaux in France category was left to be just for French palaces etc (i.e. what we as English speakers would call châteaux).

6. The Category:Castles by country lists 56 sub-categories and many of these are further divided (e.g. Castles in the United Kingdom is divided into Castles in England, Castles in Scotland, etc). The only country without a category concentrating on castles is France and this is a serious oversight. Anyone looking for details of castles in France now has to wade through a category that is not dedicated to castles!

7. The problems you identified with the original Category:Châteaux in France are real and need to be sorted, but this has been made worse by now lumping in all of the castle articles. Château de Puivert, for example, does not belong in the same category as Palace of Versailles, any more than Conisbrough Castle belongs with Buckingham Palace.

I would be interested in your comments, particularly on how to give French castles the same category status as castles in Denmark, Spain, England and other countries. I have to say, the only way I can see that happening is to reinsate the Castles in France category as it was and for some work to be done on where the real problem lies - in the Châteaux in France category. Emeraude 10:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt response (and I would have replied sooner but the PC crashed!). I suspect you're right about recreating the catgeory, but this suggests it might not be so easy User talk:Jamie Mercer#Category:Castles in France. Emeraude 11:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Castles in France. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Emeraude 15:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I can't get the request to appear in the log. I'd be grateful if you could help. I'm sure I followed the instructions accurately, but..... I'll keep trying. Emeraude 15:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Cat recreation

Hello. I don't know if you would normally see this, so I just thought that I would point it out to you, since you closed the relevant discussion. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Oswiu

I do have access to Mayr-Harting’s work from my university library. I’ve returned it recently, both because I was done with it, and because I am on holiday and didn’t want to risk someone requesting it. So, I can retrieve it when I return home, so long as no one has checked it out. He discusses Oswiu’s religious policy nicely. A good deal can be said about this, but just as a summary for an encyclopedia what we should probably focus on is this political tension between Eanflaed’s house, which is Kentish but which connects to Northumbria via Edwin, and Oswiu’s Northumbrian house and its connection to Oswald and thus Aethelfrith. Another standard way to examine the matter is to integrate Alhfrith, though this has its own difficulties. For example, we know that Alhfrith fought with his father, but we don’t know when (before or after Whitby?), and we don’t know what he was king over (though many secondary sources assert Deira, no primary source makes such an identification). Lastly, there is the question of Oswiu’s connection with British dynasties (to which we could look at Symth’s book among others). Anyway, thanks for giving attention to this page. Lostcaesar 02:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Johann Hiller

Hi Angusmclellan! I'm currently working on the Johann Hiller article and came across a sentence you added a while ago. It reads: "Furthermore, Hiller was a teacher who encouraged a musical education for women, his pupils including Elisabeth Mara and Corona Schröter." Could you provide us with a citation for this fact, please? I was not aware of the fact that Hiller was especially interested in providing women with a musical education. My information is that he was interested in educating young people of both sexes. Thanks in advance for your clarification! (Also check out the talk page for the Hiller article, please) Cheers! Matthias Röder 12:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

NowCommons tagging

Can't seem to find this on Commons; is there a typo somewhere in the tag? Cheers, – Riana ^ऋ 13:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

No worries mate! Thought it was something like that when I looked through the history, but just wanted to confirm :) Deleted now. Take care, – Riana ^ऋ 14:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Eardulf of northumbria

I'm not quite sure about the answer to this question re the coins. I'm slightly interested in Eardulf . As you say, he is supposedly the one who caught up with Ealhmund while he was rallying his forces among the Mercians, and then ealhmund (as St Alkmund) was commemorated at Derby in what became an important royal martyr shrine. There's a lot of pre-Vikin g sculpture from St Alkmund's, and an interesting reference to someone wanting to be buried there in the mid-9th century, as if it was a sort of posh mausoleum. The thing about Eardulf, is that he might just possibly be the same person as the mysterious St Hardulph who (together with the BVM) is the patron or dedicatee of the church at Breedon on the Hill (Leics) where all that fine sculpture is. Its quite possible that both these Northumbrians at different times received Mercian patronage, and ended up in royal minsters there. I think David Rollason makes the connection between Eardulf and Hardulph somewhere, and I certainly nibbled at the idea in my article on 'The Mercian Perspective' in the St Andrew's Sarcophagus Volume (Sally Foster, the original form) and probably in my Suffolk in Anglo-Saxon times. You may fairly dismiss it as speculation, however, as there is no certainty at all, but the suggestion is in print (which is the main thing for WP). As to the coins, the best place to look would be the Fitzwilliam coin database, either the Corpus of Finds, or the Sylloge, online, and that should tell you something - the link is to www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/coins/emc and you could try addressing an inquiry about this point to Dr Martin Allen FSA at the Fitz - he or Mark Blackburn will have some authoritative thing to say about it. I'm looking at J J North's English hammered coinage, Spink 1980, Vol I, pp46-7. He lists a series of coins for Eadberht, Alhred, Aethelred I (1st reign), AElfwald (779-788), Aethelred I (2nd reign) - and then goes straight into the little stycas with Eanred in 810, missing out Eardulf altogether. Then on page 47 he refers to two series of cruder stycas, the earlier being deposited in the from the Hexham hoard (dep c 845), and then a later issue, a series of blundered die-linked stycas, which were 'formerly attributed to Aethelred I, Eardwulf, Houad, Alfwald II and AElla.' This is referenced to BNJ XXVIII, p 227. I don't know what the reference says, but the implication of this is that these rather grotty late stycas are not regnal coins of c800 but some later productions. Until you can find some better reference, therefore, I should hesitate to ascribe a coinage to Eardulf, but do try emc and the fitz. Best wishes, Dr Steven Plunkett 16:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry! I didn't read your concise message carefully enough! Is the Fitz attributing coins to Eardulf? What you are probably missing is the fact that numismatists don't always agree with one another. There is a definite Oxford/Cambridge split on the interpretation of the sceattas and their dates, for example, between emc and david metcalf. It may be that Eardulf has been rehabilitated, or that the entire sequence has been reappraised. Why not ring up Martin Allen at Fitz and ask him, when you have made sense of whatever fitz information you have got. There are so many new coind discoveries with metal detectors that the interpretations are developing and changing quite rapidly. Best, Dr Steven Plunkett 16:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Glad to be of use. The point about the Breedon connection is that the sculpture there is of various dates, but the friezes should be early and derive from a structure, probably under royal patronage, which could well be of Offa or Coenwulf. And there are sarcophagus or shrine panels which are stylistically linked (rather specifically) to the art of the Book of Cerne, which (as Webster & Backhouse explain in 'Making of England') has a specific Mercian early 9th century Lichfield context. So at Breedon we are in the presence of the ruling Mercian culture of the late 8th and early 9th century, either Offa or Coenwulf (and probably both), and therefore this 'Hardulph' of the dedication must mean something. The date context is just right for the Northumbrian, and the more secure association of Northworthig (Derby) with Ealhmund/Alkmund provides a suitable parallel for Mercian royal patronage of Northumbrian royal exiles. The rivalry between Offa and Charlemagne is obviously relevant to this in view of Charlemagne's protection of Eardulf at Njmwegen. I wonder if Eardwulf ended his days at Breedon under the protection of Coenwulf and the Lichfield episcopate, which had so recently been caught up in the Legatine Council business, and was not officially voted to its former status until the Clofesho of 803. Lovely Anglo-Saxon history! What do we actually know?! Maybe Coenwulf kindnapped him! Dr Steven Plunkett 22:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I enjoy being thus referenced! The incomparable Thoyras Rapin, in his Histoire d'Angleterre of 1723 (1st Fr edn, 174-5) says of Eardulf (I translate): 'The divisions which prevailed in Northumberland always continued to tear apart this unhappy kingdom. Ardulph only kept hold of the throne by the support of one of the two factions, which happened just then to be the more powerful. But that only ensured that the other should from time to time make efforts to reinstate itself. Alcred, who had been on the throne of this kingdom, had left a son named Alcmund, who found himself at the head of this latter party. This prince beginning to make himself redoubtable, Ardulph brought about his death, judging that it was necessary to sacrifice him to his own security. (800, Sim. Dunelm.). This death being regarded as a martyrdom by the opposing party, Alcmund was added to the number of the Saints. But that was not the only effect which this violent death produced. It furnished to the enemies of the king a pretext to rise up, and to place at their head a Lord named Aldrick. He having been conquered and killed in a Combat, the malcontents remained for some time in inaction, waiting a more favourable opportunity. In fact, matters were soon completely reversed. The Party opposed to the King became at last so powerful, that this Prince, finding himself more than happy to be able to escape from his enemies by flight, went to take refuge at the Court of Charlemagne, where the English were always well-received. After Ardulphe's retreat, Alphuald II., who had chased him out, was put on the throne.' (Rapin has no mention of a second reign: AElfwald II rules about 2 years, and by his death left the throne to Eanred.)Of course this is old-fashioned history, but I thought you might enjoy it! Dr Steven Plunkett 22:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

QVJIN

Hi, any chance of this [2] hitting mainspace in the near future, I was going to write it to fill a red link and your page came up on google - so I was pleased to see it, as it is not something I know anything about, or to be honest am greatly interested in - it is just a gaping red link in the lead of a page I wrote that I would love to see blue! Regards Giano 21:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Breton and Gallo image

Hey, thanks. I was actually just using the Random article page to do some cleanup (and you know, learn stuff, too), but i'll try to fix that. Cheers! Murderbike 00:49, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:PFLive5.jpg

Deleted off Commons. I can't delete here, so I tagged them as db-copyvio. They are copyvio's because just because a site doesn't state any copyright information, doens't mean they aren't copyrighted. You can't assume free. You assume copyrighted and ask for a license. Thanks for pointing these out. MECU≈talk 18:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Messing up your sandbox

I think I have might have messed up one of your sandboxes, hope I got it back just as it were, if not - it is probably better that you revert my edits than me messing more around. SORRY, Finnrind 21:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks fine to me! No problem at all. Hope you're well, Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Glad to see no damage was done. I'm well thank you, and (late)congrats on your adminship. I do hope that your administrative efforts still will leave you time to finish what you've got hidden in those boxes ;-) It would be a shame it was left only to be plundered by norse marauders, who most likely will end up keeping just the cover, and leave the real valuables buried. Finnrind 22:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I managed to get Oswiu and Aldfrith out of the sandbox, and expanded - but perhaps not improved - Eardwulf, as well as writing Guthfrith, King of York, so I'm still making some progress. Is there anything exciting in Norwegian sources on Guthfrith (or Guthred) son of Cnut? I hope I'll finish the Eoganachta this weekend. Next stop should be making Ivar the Boneless look more like no:Ivar Beinlause. Plenty to keep me busy! Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:19, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Jpeg editor

Left him a note.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Ethelbald of Mercia

Thanks for the support on Ethelbald of Mercia; much appreciated. I am a novice at this historical period and appreciate all the help I can get. Mike Christie (talk) 02:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_April_19#Category:PETA supporters

I was just trawling through the log of the 19th, looking to close all the remaining debates, when I came across the above. That's the second time I've done that in a few days—I really need to read these things through before I save the page! Of course you were right, the result was to delete (hence the CFD/W listing). I've amended the closure to reflect the actual result.

Now, I'd better see about cutting down on this backlog—rather my fault I'm afraid, I've not done much over the past few days.

Xdamr^talk 11:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I haven't done much myself, but I'm trying to get a few closed out now. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Hammond organist cat debate

Hi. I tried to move my listified version of the category into mainspace, and discovered that a list already exists! It's a little sad that neither I nor anyone else at the CfD debate noticed this. Oh well. Anyway, I've now merged everything from my list into the existing list, so you should feel free to finish off Category:Hammond organ players. Cheers, Xtifr _tälk 13:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Lukas19

Hi, you have had some dealings with this editor. I'd appreciate your opinion regarding a suspected sockpuppet if you have time. Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Lukas19. Cheers. Alun 14:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Category:Lymphology discussion

I must say, I don't agree with your decision to close the discussion[3] on this category. There was only a single "keep" vote opposing my nomination for deletion, so it is not fair to say that a consensus has been reached. There is still not even a Wikipedia page on Lymphology, so it seems silly to have a category for it (which still only contains one page). I disagree with the commenter that pages should be moved out of Category:Lymphatic system and into this very esoteric category. -Rustavo^{Talk/Contribs} 21:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

IRC cloak request

I am amcl on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/angusmclellan. Thanks. -- Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Registering a complaint about a CFD decision

Apparently some people, pigheaded and ignorant, took it upon themselves to reinstitute the request to delete the category known as Peel Session artists. These individuals have no idea as to the importance of said category, and they certainly don't show themselves to be experts of the progression of popular music by their continued persistence in denying that the Peel Sessions artists category was, is, and continues to be vital and necessary. I am thus registering a complaint on your talk space, as you were the admin who rendered the final judgement on this matter, that the voting on this issue was uninformed to say the least, and that the category needs to be reinstated and protected from further deletion by individuals who do not know or recognize the importance of it. (Krushsister 04:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC))

Some Anglo-Saxon thoughts

Angus, since you're both active and knowledgeable about Anglo-Saxon history, I thought I'd get your opinion on something, if you have a minute. I have been working on several AS articles, and plan to do some more, and as I work through them there have been several issues I would have liked to have been able to discuss at an active WikiProject on Anglo-Saxon England. For example, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle gets cited all over the place, and I think it would be good to have a standard form for citing it. Kirby (which just arrived; thanks for the pointer on that) seems to use inline citations of the form "(ASC BCDE, s.a. 713)", sometimes without the "s.a.", though I can't find an example on a quick scan. I like this and think it might be worth making a standard, perhaps via a template; I am not sure that it should be inline, but I like the compact list of versions that support a cite. This brings up a second point, the use of "s.a.", which is going to be unfamiliar to many readers, but is standard in the secondary sources. Or how about the (also standard) use of italics, as in Degsastan, to indicate a placename the location of which has not been identified with certainty? Can we use that as a standard? Another example: for many topics I am quite keen on including a section in the article that discusses the sources for that article (especially early ones where there is a lot of dubious information), including a discussion of the manuscript history and the reliability of the sources. Should that be a standard?

Some of these would require discussion outside any Anglo-Saxon wiki project, e.g. at a citations talk page. For those that do not, the trouble is that the closest existing project seems much too broad for this. I also definitely do not have the time and energy to create and sustain a more specialized WikiProject; I don't think there would be all that many very active participants, in fact -- looking through article histories I am guessing there are maybe twenty or thirty people with serious interest in this area, not all of whom are active in the area now.

I think the most logical thing for me to do is to create a subpage of my user page and post some notes there about open questions, citation format, article style and so on. Then I can refer to that in any talk page discussions, and perhaps it can evolve into the starting point for a WikiProject over time, if someone else wants to take that on.

The other thing I'd like to do, if you have time, is to ping you periodically with questions about these points -- at least just for a sanity check. If you say, for example, that having a "sources" section in each early AS article sounds like a good idea to you, then I will go ahead with that without worrying too much; if you feel that "s.a." will always be too technical for a general readership, I'll drop that idea till we get more people to discuss it. The goal, for me, would be just to make sure I'm not off in the weeds doing something nobody agrees with -- not to get extended discussion.

Anyway, let me know what you think; and sorry for such a long post -- you've been so helpful in the past I thought I'd presume on your goodwill again. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 11:15, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Bob McElwaine

Re: your comments here, it turns out that, at least as of last Thursday, he's still alive and kicking. I saw him walking up the State St. hill on my way to lunch. :-) Too bad that looks too much like OR. :-\ Tomer^talk 23:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Yoghurt

I want to start out by saying I'm really sorry that this happened - I did my best to stop it (since the discussion has happened so many times), but sadly I have been overruled by 4 people who are obsessed with name changing (regardless of whether or not I agree with them). There is a new debate on the Yoghurt talk page about the move - I just felt it would be best if most people who had voted in the past knew about this.danielfolsom 00:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

User:AlexNewArtBot

Hi Angusmclellan/Archive 9, as a WikiProject Scotland participant, please check out this this thread and consider adding the bot results page to your watchlist so we can manually update the New Articles page. There are some false results for the first batch, but I'm sure we can collectively tune the rules to improve the output.

If we get enough people watching the results page, we'll be cooking with gas as they say :)   This looks like a great helper in finding new Scotland related material. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 01:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Scots.jpg

Hello Angusmclellan, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Scots.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Angusmclellan/scottish people. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 08:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Biased Censorship and Double Standards

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Movement to Impeach Liberals. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Ymous 19:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Really? Then why is the article Movement to Impeach George Bush Allowed allowed? Bias? Double standards? You didn't even follow the proper procedures. You just deleted it, even after I put the hangon tag up. This is bias of the most gross nature. Ymous 19:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Welsh article

Hi Angus. Thank you for editing the page about john walter jones. Is it possible to delete the history for this page please? Alternatively, can the entry be deleted? If you could delete it and then just reload what's there now, that would do me a huge favour. All my stuff was written in an ill advised fit of rage. I regret it. Thank you. --Mathew 10:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Pictish kings and early scottish kings

Angus, how are you these days? OK, I'm going to regretfully bother you for a minute or so. I propose to you that we should get around to renaming the Pictish kings, and at least some of the early "Scottish" kings (like there is actually a difference). The numbering system, I think, has to go. It is ambiguous, not in use by anyone except wikipedia, and totally misleading (i.e. not all Pictish kings are known, so how can you number them?). I propose the form X m. Y. I have no preference for either "Gaelic" forms or "Pictish" forms, though like Clancy I'm wary of drawing too much of a distinction (where do you drop one set of forms for another?). An example would be Bridei m. Beli. "M." rather than "map" or "mac" avoids the P vs Q thing, though only mac is actually attested for any Pictish king or person. I know you have expressed a like for the forms "X, son of Y"; the problem with this is that for many of these kings, if not most, our sources have only left genitive forms, with nominative forms lost and unreconstructed. E.g. Bridei, son of Foith or son of Uuid, is probably grammatically inaccurate because Foith/Uuid are genitive forms, but Bridei m. Uuid or Bridei/Bruide m. Foith are correct. For many they have nicknames, Nechtan Morbet for instance, or Drest of the Hundred Battles, and I personally would prefer these to "X m. Y" forms. Then there's the two Oenguses. I'd propose Oengus I, and Oengus II. These are not ambiguous. I'm strongly in favour of extending this into the post-Cinadian kings, but here the problem of the Use English Nazis might make this difficult. I'm not in favour of another farce about this. Is there a way, d'you think, that some kind of compromise could be worked? Until Edgar, with the exception of the Causantins, Scottish monarchs have unique names. So Donald I, Duncan I, etc, should be fine. A broad range of opinions I presume must at least be sought. Anyways, get back to me on this when you have time. Best regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 07:07, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

CfD closings

Just about anything that can not use a bot should be listed on the manual sub page. There are many sections there and you can add one to describe exactly what needs to be done if an existing heading does not cover the case you are adding. Vegaswikian 19:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion Review

I took two category deletions to deletion review here. Since you were the closing administrator, I thought you'd like to know. Cheers.--Chaser - T 22:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, someone at the DRV suggested asking if you were OK with a relisting, in which case we could presumably just end the DRV (consensus is already pretty clear, but I'm certainly not judging it).--Chaser - T 14:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

A New Raedwald Article?

Dear Angus, Hi! I am on the mend but munching my way through the European pill mountain after my recent heart attack.... Not too bad, but over-confined with WP! How are you enjoying your new powers? Driven you mad yet? I thought I might have been voting for you on the Board Elections????....
Any how, here's what... User:Mike Christie is proposing to completely overhaul the Raedwald of East Anglia article, which as it stands is mostly what I wrote back in the spring. He did the makeover, asked me what I thought, I gave him a set of responses, and then he obviously thought he had offended me and reverted to 'my' version (i.e. what I had done, basically), but we have agreed to look at his new version in a sandtray in his Userpage area, at User:Mike Christie/Raedwald draft. I have just (after a few days' thought about this) taken his first three sentences and written a statement about them in comparison with the opening statements as it was, and I have posted all this on the discussion page to the Raedwald draft in his User area. I would regard it as a distinct favour if you were to drop by and glance at what is going on. I know you've met Mike in here and would value your esteemed overview of things. See also my and his discussion pages.. Best wishes, Dr Steven Plunkett 01:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Gunnhild Mother of Kings

Thought you might be interested in this new article- it sort of falls within your area of interest. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Franks FAR

Franks has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.--Peter Andersen 20:24, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

The Rock Image Is Flipped; Please Correct It

I can tell you from first hand observation of el Sakhra, the following image is flipped horizontally:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:The_rock_of_the_Dome_of_the_Rock_PD-OLD.jpg.JPG

I've further confirmed my suspicions using Leen Ritmeyer's THE QUEST: REVEALING THE TEMPLE MOUNT IN JERUSALEM. I'm not familiar enough with Wikipedia to know how to fix it. I did inform the Library of Congress, but they've not corrected the image yet. As you seem to be the one who contributed the image to Wikipedia, may I ask you to correct the image? Thanks.

The Panda Band

As a contibutor to the above article would appreciate your feedback as to whether the articles on The Panda Band's album This Vital Chapter should be deleted - your feedback is important as to whether the item is retained or deleted. Dan arndt 09:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Re;Faranyear

Boardman calls him "John Faranyear" on p. 173 of Early Stewart Kings. I looked through for elaborations, but 'tis not in the index and I couldn't find any other mentions at this instance. You should add it if you can remember what it means, as I can't. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 12:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Native American flautists

Hi Angusmclellan,

you probably don't know me but I, or rather my bot, do some of the WP:CFD/W work. You recently listed a speedy rename of Category:Native American flutists to Category:Native American flautists on the work page which my bot carried out an hour or so ago.

After the bot had finished, Badagnani left a note on my my bot's talk page and expressed his concern over the rename and I have to admit that his argument is not completely without merit. Could I ask you to please review the matter? Thanks. S ^up? 14:10, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all. And I appreciate the message. :) If you'd prefer, I could just have my bot move them back. Cheers S ^up? 14:19, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The real problem with this is not the flautists/flutists one (where I think Badagnani is clearly wrong), but the ambiguity of "Native American". The category should not have been speedied. A CfD would probably have renamed to Category:Players of the Native American flute, which should still be done. Johnbod 14:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Your suggestion seems to address the ambiguity nicely John, so a CFD would indeed be the way to go. I can list it if you like, but I don't want to steal your thunder... Let me know. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm useless at the template, so go ahead! I checked the "musicians by instrument" parent category, btw, & all seem ok - I think Category:Appalachian dulcimer players is not likely to confuse. Johnbod 14:34, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, I just wanted to drop you a quick note to say that the bot just finished and that you're very much welcome. :) Hope you have a great day. Cheers S ^up? 14:43, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Stalking

I have come to the end of my tether. The campaign by User:Mallimak and his countless dynamic IP sockpuppets has now descended to pure stalking behaviour. The Wikipedia community cannot allow this behaviour to continue. I am asking you, and other Admins and Users who have had to deal with Mallimak in the past, to review the situation. Please see:

• User_talk:SFC9394#Firm_guidance_to_door_required

--Mais oui! 09:59, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Image appropriate for commons?

Hi. I was wondering about Image:Archbishop's Palace.jpg. It was tagged as {{PD-self}} and you uploaded it to commons. But I notice the user specified that they retrieved it from some forum which does not appear to release any copyright (and is in a post which includes images with clear copyright marks) and the user has a talk page full of image tagging warnings and deletions. I am nervous about the propriety of this image. Did you verify the image in some other way? —Wknight94 (talk) 11:35, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

How right you are, definitely this is dubiously tagged as pd. I've removed the license tag on the Commons version. Probably the one here should go too. Thanks for the warning, Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Æthelberht

Thanks for the nice words about Æthelberht of Kent. I've been working on a few other Anglo-Saxon kings, and I noticed the work you've done on the Northumbrians. If you're interested in getting any of them up to FA standard, I'd be glad to help -- not that you need the help, but I'd be interested in working on it with you if you want. Mostly I'm focusing on the Wessex kings right now; I think I'm going to try to get them all up to FA, though the lesser kings may just get merged back into the Wessex article.

Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 12:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

fall protection

first off. i put a hangon tag on this article why did u delete it??????????????????????? second i was given permission by the administrator who deleted it yesterday to put it back up today.... so technically i have the right to do so.. so i ask again why did u delete this article...????????????????????????? Jeff dantonio 20:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Ya im curious for what company would i be advertising for then??? this is informative info about fall protection, harnesses which provide body security then lanyards which provide fall arrest protection and connectors which provide the anchor to whatever you hang from. then i placed the standards which govern these safety materials. Jeff dantonio 20:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Aimée Bologne-Lemaire

Merci pour cette page. José Fontaine jose.fontaine@skynet.be et présent su la WP en français.

Ulster Under-21 Hurling Championship

Sorry about wasting your time with that. I put the speedy tag on there yesterday when I was reviewing the Special:Newpages. When it appeared, it looked like some unreferenced junk that happens to appear so prevalently and I tagged it. Apparently, it cleaned itself up fairly well and I forgot to take the tag down. My apologies. -- VegitaU 14:23, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Early Medieval Scotland areas

Hi, I noticed you were the creator of this image: . Just a comment to say that Dalriada should also include parts of Ulster (mainly County Antrim). Jonto 14:26, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Allegations of Chinese apartheid AfD

Following your recent participation in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 30#Allegations of American apartheid, you may be interested to know that a related article, Allegations of Chinese apartheid, is currently being discussed on AfD. Comments can be left at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of Chinese apartheid. -- ChrisO 15:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --Elonka 03:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Lauder

If you have time, and maybe you won't, can you take a look at Talk:Lauder. It's kind of a delicate situation, since David is rather committed to the mythological history of his family, and it probably won't be possible for me to communicate the contemporary scholarly view on such matters. He is already very angry, and I can't see how I can avoid antagonizing him except by asking for competent third party intervention. Best regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Isabel Ice

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Isabel Ice. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Epbr123 22:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Fitzwilliam coin images PD?

Angus, I wonder if you could give me an admin opinion -- I'd like to use an image of a coin from the Fitzwilliam EMC. Specifically, coin EMC number 1924.0391. I would like it for the Egbert of Wessex article. Are coins like this public domain, do you know? Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 11:51, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's about what I was thinking. Another possibility: I believe currency cannot be copyrighted, but does that mean that images of the currency are uncopyrighted? I think I've seen something about this somewhere in the copyright pages, but can't find it. I think I'll post a query to WT:C; or is there a better place to ask, do you know? Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 13:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

They cannot be used, it seems. Here's the link. Mike Christie (talk) 01:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Curses! Foiled Again!

So much for my Return of the Pink Panther pretensions! Thanks! What new stuff are you up to? Have a few new stubs and articles I hope to write up soon. '

kucinich

why did u delete a page on kucinich.us

An offical campaign site IS significant

For some reason, it appears Www.kucinich.us has re-appeared, despite your previous deletion of the article.

I have resubmitted it for Speedy Deletion - A7, though it appears it also qualifies under General - 4 (Recreation of deleted material).

Just wanted to let you know that this page is back...just with "Www" added.

JasonCNJ 22:21, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

This is getting to be a disruption to Wikipedia. I'd like to know your thoughts on how best to proceed...after Kucinich.us was deleted, and then recreated as Www.kucinich.us, and then deleted via consensus, Kucinich.us was created again.

Should I relist for AfD? Can you speedy delete under A7 or G4? Is there some action that should be taken against User_talk:Zelogan for his repeated recreations of deleted content?

JasonCNJ 19:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I hate to sound like a broken record but...I'll give you one guess as to what article has just been recreated. You got it... Kucinich.us.

I question the extent to which you -- and the community -- can continue to go in circles like this: (re)creation, speedy deletion, recreation. We've all tried to talk to the editor and you left a note about this process yesterday. The page creation screen makes clear that the page has been deleted several times.

Is there something else we can do (in addition to another speedy deletion)?

JasonCNJ 14:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this. Now I know what everyone meant in AfD when they said "delete and salt." But, alas, I do not think that will be enough. Check out Kucinich campaign site. When is it appropriate to block a user from disrupting Wikipedia? JasonCNJ 16:34, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

block

thanks Tvoz |talk 21:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The pleasure was all mine! Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Have spies manipulated you like they have manipulated Wikipedia?

<conversation removed>

Fooian converts to Islam

I have been re-doing them, and any assistance you can provide would be appreciated. Carlossuarez46 21:02, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

• • THANK YOU for following through and helping out. Carlossuarez46 21:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
• It's easy to make suggestions, but a rare treat when someone helps out in implementing them. I didn't want it to unnoticed or unthanked. Carlossuarez46 21:26, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Aed Fin(d)liath

I see you corrected the name in the infobox to Findliath, I suppose the name should then be corrected elsewhere as well and the article be moved to this name. I see Corrain uses a third version (Finnliath), but I believe the most important thing here is that we try to stick to one name. Happy editing, Finnrind 14:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Evolution of stars

Hi - I've undone the redirects you did here as the page MUST be considered for full deletion as we cannot have copyright violations on Wikipedia, even if they are only in the page history. Exxolon 21:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Aldfrith and Flann Sina

Angus, I saw your note asking me to take a look at Flann Sinna; I haven't been ignoring it -- just keeping busy with the Ine of Wessex FAC. I have a few more things to add to that still -- found some good stuff in Yorke on subkings in Wessex that I think is worth putting in -- and after that I should have a bit more bandwidth. I'd be happy to look at Flann Sina, but outside the Anglo-Saxons my knowledge is very limited. I'll see if I can come up with some substantive comments.

On Aldfrith, I am also hoping to do a review and there I may be able to find a bit more to say, though I'm a bit weaker on the Northumbrians than some of the southern kingdoms -- I've been avoiding working on them, partly because I could see you were doing a fine job on several of them already. But I think this is close enough to FA that it's worth pushing for. Mike Christie (talk) 13:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

GA pass for Dunstan

Congratulations on an excellent copyedit on the suggestions provided. I now have no hesitation in passing Dunstan as a Good Article, and have updated the templates on the article talk page. You may wish to copy the following template: {{User Good Article|Dunstan}} and paste it to somewhere suitable (such as your user page). It will produce the following userbox <redacted>


and add you to the category "Good Article contributors".

Well done! EyeSerene^TALK 19:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I can't take any credit, but it's something that could quite easily be FA-quality, so there's plenty more to do. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:00, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I think I'm done on Flann Sinna

I've added a few more; hope they're useful. Would you like me to review Aldfrith in the same way? Let me know if that would be useful. Mike Christie (talk) 01:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Rajesh k pillania

This article Rajesh k pillania is not a notable person. That is why i requested a speedy delete. --SkyWalker 16:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

South Tyrol

hello there Angusmclellan, you once voted and showed interest on the topic of South Tyrol. Certain Italian users just can't seem to give the topic a rest and had the article moved with a sham vote to the Italian name. I am calling for that vote to be annulled or at least extended so that more can vote and the result be representative. Drop by the talk page or drop me a message if you would like to share your thoughts, I am interested in hearing from you. sincerely Gryffindor 04:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)