User talk:Deacon of Pndapetzim

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
SEMI-RETIRED
This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.

Contents

WP:FOUR RFC[edit]

There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:26, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox problem[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Infobox problem has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. eh bien mon prince (talk) 21:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

"Wiki Loves Libraries" edit-athon in Vancouver, WA[edit]

Vancouver WA library with sign.jpg WIKI LOVES LIBRARIES 2013!
You are invited to attend the upcoming "Wiki Loves Libraries" edit-athon. The event will be held from 2:30–4:30pm on Sunday, November 17, 2013 at the Vancouver Community Library (901 C Street) in Vancouver, Washington. The edit-athon will focus on creating and expanding articles related to Vancouver and Clark County. Details and signup here!

You are receiving this message because you are listed as an active member of WikiProjectOregon or WikiProject Washington. This message was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:17, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Get your cameras ready! Christmas in Oregon and PDX Pods[edit]

This month, WikiProject Oregon features two photo campaigns:

The concept is simple: upload photos of these two topics and share your work! Whether you upload one or one hundred, these images will help capture the culture of our state and illustrate Wikimedia projects. Have fun, and happy holiday season! You are receiving this because you are listed as an active member of WikiProject Oregon or WikiProject Washington. This message was delivered on behalf of Wikipedia:Meetup/Portland by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:48, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of David Dumville[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article David Dumville has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Couldn't establish that he meets WP:PROF or WP:GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 11:07, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays...[edit]

Waltensburger Chur2.jpg Happy Holidays
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:44, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays[edit]

074 Frontal d'altar de Mosoll, els Reis d'Orient.jpg Happy Holidays
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. - Ealdgyth - Talk 15:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of View from nowhere for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article View from nowhere is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/View from nowhere (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Thargor Orlando (talk) 14:36, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity[edit]

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cathróe (disambiguation)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Cathróe (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnecessary disambiguation per WP:TWODABS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Tavix (talk) 23:45, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Cathróe (disambiguation)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Cathróe (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
  • disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. PamD 16:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Can you check...[edit]

...your !vote here? Your comment seems to say that you think "Kiev" is the common name, but by !voting "Oppose" you're actually supporting "Kyiv". I just want to make sure that your !vote represents what you want it to. BMK (talk) 02:55, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that, yep, pretty dumb of me. Have fixed. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 03:03, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. BMK (talk) 03:12, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back[edit]

Good to see you back again once in a while. Hope you'll stay around! Best, – Fut.Perf. 05:44, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

That's nice, cheers. And thanks for tweaking my Byzantine edits. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 13:37, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Good to see you too. Unfortunately, I'm in the beginnings of a move so am not very active right now, but hope to return to editing sometime after moving (moving a horse farm isn't as simple as moving an flat...) Ealdgyth - Talk 13:52, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Wiki is really different now, it's more like twitter than what I remember. Anyway, good luck with your move! :) Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 13:58, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Ditto the above! Missed your input. Bill Reid | (talk) 17:24, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, hope you are well Bill. I see Elgin Cathedral finally became an FA. Congrats on that! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:44, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

December 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Earl of Carrick may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • '''Earl of Carrick''' was a title of the ruler of [[Carrick, Scotland|Carrick (now southern Ayrshire), subsequently part of the [[Peerage of Scotland]].

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:45, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

It's that season again...[edit]

Saturnalia by Antoine Callet.jpg Happy Saturnalia
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:22, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Catholic-Hierarchy.org[edit]

Hello. I noticed that you have edited a number of articles on Catholicism. A discussion is taking place as to whether the website Catholic-Hierarchy.org is a reliable source that can be utilized on Wikipedia or whether all references and information derived from it should be deleted. This topic is currently being discussed at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard [1]. As the website's removal as a reference will affect several thousand Wikipedia articles, I believe that the broadest range of opinions should be obtained before action is taken. Please contribute if interested.Patapsco913 (talk) 22:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

a clever use of a 'baudolino' name, my good deacon of pndapetzim![edit]

hello there, deacon of pndapetzim! i am BB10, and i am very happy to see a fellow baudolino enthusiast as well, in wikipedia!

ah yes, i love baudolino, its one of umberto eco's many excellent books, a personal favorite, and i will always love all of his works. its sad to see him gone... may umberto eco rest in peace.

i really liked baudolino's quest at the realm of john the prester, and how he met with the deacon of pndapetzim, the lepper-deacon of the area. such a great story!

also, i like your editing works, and you seem like a cool person.

its nice to meet you!

BB10clock (talk) 23:51, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Culloden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Episcopalians. 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) 10:20, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

dear deacon, i need your help, in a specific subject. (a new WP article about flash animation & internet phenomena. (text is a bit long, sorry)[edit]

dear deacon, hello.

i am BB10, and i would like your help/your insight about a certain subject.

i would like to have the opinion of a seasoned wikipedia editor on whether a specific article can be added in here, or not.

the article in question is: Clock Crew. (group of flash animators, it has inspired some internet inside-jokes, memes, and they have created more than 400 movies in their long presence online. (from 2001, to this day today. (15 years old))

i would like to know if i can request from someone neutral(like you), to create a page that doesnt exist yet. (otherwise, please direct me towards an editor that will be available/happy to write such an article for me. thank you.)

furthermore, would like to (slowly) become a reasonable and helpful editor of WP, and to provide my knowledge, insight and helping hand at any matter, in my small way. (i will not do many things for now, but if i get better and learn the rules of this encyclopedia, then i shall be more helpful)

i would like to create/request for a specific page to be created in wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_Crew if anyone wishes, i can provide links, internet news sites links, and various parts of evidence, proving the existence and the notability of this group/article.

ofcourse, since i used to be a part of this group, i will not create, nor will i participate in the writing of the article, so i shall ask for someone neutral to create this article, and i will only provide the evidence of its notability/existence/noteworthy value.

(i repeat: if needed, i shall only provide the necessary links/evidence/news about this groups relevance/existence, both in the internet pop-culture, and in some mediums)

it seems that some wikipedia editors have deleted this page in the past, due to the homepage not being active, but i have a link of the webpage, and it seems that it's still active. also, i have some evidence about this groups existence/notability.

can you please help me about this specific topic? please be kind, and civilized. thank you.

some links: (sorry if its a bit long, but if i want to present sustainable evidence about a group's/an article's validity/existence, then i have to provide sufficient links+evidence about it)

-youtube appearance and mention on the 'tom green show': [Youtube link removed as probable copyright violation]

-youtube documentary about a young man dressing up as strawberry clock, and spreading the word about the Clock Crew in trinity college in dublin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY_M4o3SWmY (unofficial title of the documentary is strawberry clock goes to dublin in case you need a more appropriate title for the video)

-also, the Clock Crew has been mentioned alot in those independent sites: http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/subcultures/clock-crew http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Website/TheClockCrew https://vimeo.com/tag:clock+crew

also, the Clock Crew's music album, has been featured in here: https://www.discogs.com/Clock-Crew-stopAllSounds/release/2545500 http://metunes.ru/release-idcfeihef/stopAllSounds https://www.discogs.com/label/217737-Clock-Crew-Music

-also, mentions in the 'urban dictionary' : http://el.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Strawberry+Clock http://el.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=king+of+the+portal

it should also be noted, that the Clock Crew, has been mentioned as a minor easter egg on the videogame Dying Light, and i can provide evidence of this below: http://steamcommunity.com/groups/newgroundsgames/curation/app/239140/ (it should be noted that both the steam group owner, and the commenters below are NOT CC members, and they are only gamers/users that are only familiar with the terms Clock Crew and of its online history.)

here is a mention in this link, by Tom Fulp, who is neither a Clock Crew member, nor a sponsor of any shape or form: http://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic/1383120

also, the Clock Crew could be added into the Flash Cartoons category, which is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Flash_cartoons

i do believe that, with over 400 flash animations online, the CC fits the bill on that specific subject.

once again, i apologise fo the HUGE message, and for the 1 million links, but please read them if you have time to spare, and please help me out with this rather complicated subject. i shall not write an article about this group, because i used to belong in it, and i dont want to have a conflict of interest.

have a nice day.

BB10clock (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2016 (UTC)


Dear BB10clock.
Looking over the page, Clock Crew was deleted on the grounds that it failed Wikipedia's tests of notability. Generally, Wikipedia's rule is that a topic needs to be covered in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, see this general guide to notability guidelines for more. Wikipedia's definition of 'reliable sources' is also a bit hard to pin down, but generally the more 'establishment', the more powerful the media outlet or publisher, the more likely it is to be classified as 'reliable' by Anglophone Wikipedians. For restoring this, you could look at the page WP:AFTERDELETE--however, based on the links you have posted here, I am not sure that your prospects of success are very high here. Wikipedia's policy is about making encyclopedic content that is manageable, so sets limits about what can be included....but this doesn't mean that Clock Crew are not important, perhaps only that you need better exposure or better PR. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 16:10, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Standard Mandarin listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Standard Mandarin. Since you had some involvement with the Standard Mandarin redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Genie listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Genie. Since you had some involvement with the Genie redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 15:28, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Ireland (state) listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Ireland (state). Since you had some involvement with the Ireland (state) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. SSTflyer 08:14, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 28, 2016[edit]

Hi, here's one of yours at TFA, I'm working on the TFA text now. - Dank (push to talk) 02:52, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Roman And Byzantine Military History[edit]

Hello I currently have a project known as the Roman and Byzantine military history page Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Incubator/Roman and Byzantine Military History, I was wondering if you would like to join, as you have shown interest in byzantine history. Iazyges (talk) 19:04, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Falklands[edit]

Hi Deacon! I noticed the recent changes you made to the Falkland Islands page (and other related pages to the term "Falkland"). I am interested in learning more about the source you bring up and the information it contains. If you can be so kind as to share it with us at Talk:Falkland Islands, it would be most welcome. Have a great day!--MarshalN20 Talk 16:23, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

None of us are "owners" of the Falkland Islands article, which is why I was the one who encouraged you to present your views in this article's talk page ([2]). You've made bold changes to a featured article, without first discussing them in the talk page; this is why your contributions have been reverted and now we are discussing them (per the WP:BRD cycle). Your changes were also wrong on technical aspects, as you yourself accept lacking the knowledge on how to properly cite material ([3]). I have politely requested that you provide the quote from Taylor and Markus supporting the bold claims, but so far you have not done so; however, you have confirmed that Taylor and Markus only point out that "falcon land" is a folk etymology. Have a good day.--MarshalN20 Talk 21:22, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Interesting, so now we have a third reason for your edit-warring. First it was WP:BRD, second it was that you believed a tertiary source to be a superior authority on Fife place-names than Fife place-name specialist S. Taylor, and, thirdly, now you were edit warring because you got the article through a FA vote and you believe that FAs can't be improved by editors other than yourself without explaining things to you that you could easily find out yourself on the talkpage. I've suggested that you reread or read WP:BRD (which you have actually disregarded despite your reliance on it), and I also suggest that you re-read my edit and comments, which you have summarised incorrectly. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 21:37, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Precious[edit]

history of the Scots

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

Thank you for quality articles on medieval history such as Óengus I and De Situ Albanie, for related navboxes and categories, for "removed a contradictory opening sentence", for letting historic personalities say hello, - professional historian, repeating from 2 June 2009: you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for today's Donnchadh, Earl of Carrick! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 04:58, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1466 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:21, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your share of Urse d'Abetot, "a somewhat obscure figure in Anglo-Norman history, not a big magnate, but definitely powerful and through his daughter ancestor of an important family in late Medieval England. He's mainly famous for invoking a rhyming curse from Ealdred."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:28, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for Siward, Earl of Northumbria! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:46, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Three years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:36, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Padlock-blue.svgHello, Deacon of Pndapetzim. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins[edit]

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers[edit]

Hi Deacon of Pndapetzim.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Deacon of Pndapetzim. 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)

Happy Saturnalia![edit]

Lawrence Alma-Tadema 06.jpeg Happy Saturnalia
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:36, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Admin mop.PNG Administrator changes

Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirateSchwede66K6kaEaldgythFerretCyberpower678Mz7PrimefacDodger67
Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg BriangottsJeremyABU Rob13

Green check.svg Guideline and policy news

Octicons-tools.svg Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Scale of justice 2.svg Arbitration

Nuvola apps knewsticker.png Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Donnchadh, Earl of Carrick scheduled for TFA[edit]

This is to let you know that the Donnchadh, Earl of Carrick article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 13 April 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 13, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:28, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

FYI, I've moved this to April 19th to solve a TFA scheduling problem. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:48, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Hypothesis[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Hypothesis has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 23:06, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Nationalhistory[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Nationalhistory has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 01:14, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Gillemachoi Nominated for Speedy Deletion[edit]

A7 - no indication of importance. A serf mentioned once in a charter. Nobody even knows why and it seems unlikely any more on him will be forthcoming. Paul S (talk) 22:00, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Nobody knows why what? Don't understand that element of the question. The subject is significant for a number of reasons, some of which were asserted in the article, though admittedly he never appeared in a reality tv show or played substitute goalkeeper for a non-league club in England. But you've already got it deleted, so well done, another great Wikipedian worker, just take some time to socialize and make friends and you'll be elected to ArbCom by next year. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:59, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Heh. Glad to see you pop up, Deacon. Wish you'd stick around longer... Ealdgyth - Talk 20:05, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Hey Ealdgyth, thanks. Don't really have much time these days, but who knows in the future. Hope you are doing well. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 16:12, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

In fact, the article wasn't speedily deleted, so we still have a stub article about one serf in late 12 Century Scotland. Historians everywhere will no doubt be resting easier in their beds. Paul S (talk) 14:50, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

The article was deleted when I posted that. It was restored by Catfish Jim and the Soapdish. In response to your other comment, all I'd say is that generally it's a good idea not to fuss too much over something when you're not interested in it or knowledgeable about it.Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:59, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Deacon of Pndapetzim. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Saturnalia![edit]

Pompeii - Osteria della Via di Mercurio - Dice Players.jpg Happy Saturnalia
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free and you not often get distracted by dice-playing. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:52, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:Celticists has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Celticists, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Catrìona (talk) 22:42, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox monastery[edit]

Template:Infobox monastery has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox church. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Chicbyaccident (talk) 16:06, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox Medieval Scottish Diocese[edit]

Template:Infobox Medieval Scottish Diocese has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox diocese. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Chicbyaccident (talk) 16:11, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Category:Articles presenting hypothesis as fact has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Articles presenting hypothesis as fact, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  21:53, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Alba synonymous with Scotland[edit]

While I'm obviously aware that you're semi-retired from WP, I thought it might be useful to have your input in a discussion that has sprung up on Talk:Picts and subsequently moved to Talk:Kingdom of Alba Catfish Jim and the soapdish 11:07, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not sure I was able to pick up on the logic of the discussion, but I left a comment. Thanks. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 11:17, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Cheers...
While we're here I've been putting off editing Picts in light of Alex Woolf's article last year in The Scottish Historical Review. As attractive as it might be, it seems inescapable that Pictish identity was not as defined as is suggested in that article. Thoughts? Catfish Jim and the soapdish 12:55, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
No bother. Yes, indeed, that note raises very serious problems about orthodox views of the Picts. But the current Picts article could still be improved significantly (and there's the old thing about Wikipedia dealing with what is verifiable rather than what is true). What significant issues do you foresee? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:11, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Oh just the usual... trying to sift facts from fiction without resorting to OR. I think the "otherness" of the Picts has been entirely overstated and many of the facts of Pictish history are exaggerations. I think the P/Q language model is probably inappropriate for that time, that Dun Nechtain was probably not a decisive victory, etc. But I've also realised the scale of issues throughout WP... knowing where to start... Catfish Jim and the soapdish 19:56, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes, it is difficult to write about these topics while limiting one's personal views about the topics, you can only try your best. I tended to limit my contributions to early medieval stuff partly on that basis, even though when I started Wikipedia I was doing courses on the Picts and the Men of the North. The recent Markús book on early Scotland does a good job emphasising the importance of Romanization and how un-unique the Picts might have been in various respects. Still, Pictish symbols are unique, nothing like them anywhere. The distinctiveness of the Picts may be fading, but (per the recent Woolf note) the potential uniqueness and importance of Fortriu within the Insular World may be rising to take their place? On the other hand, most Scots still will never have heard of the polity and Wikipedia's article is pretty pathetic, barely larger than the article I created as a semi-stub in 2005! But it strikes me that you might want to play around with that article first, perhaps at least after the new Nick Evans book comes out later next year. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:30, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
I'll pick up those books. Are you picking up emails from WP? Catfish Jim and the soapdish 17:54, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Should be, yes. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:13, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

─────────────── Okay... I have some thoughts on the Pictish Language that fall firmly into the realms of original research that I'd like to run past you. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 16:37, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello, would you mind sharing those thoughts, Catfish? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.178.222 (talk) 13:13, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@Catfish Jim, did you send that email? Haven't received anything. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 12:12, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
No... Still thinking about it... not so sure I was thinking anything particularly novel. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 16:21, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Deacon of Pndapetzim. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Deacon of Pndapetzim. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Pictland = Scotland[edit]

Hello, I've read a couple of your comments on talk pages related to Scottish articles and you do seem to echo a similar sort of opinion that Pictland was basically just Scotland. I see you're also a professional historian. I was wondering if you wouldn't mind clarifying your position on the Pictish/Scottish scenario, and when do you think it would be appropriate to start referring to Pictland as Scotland or the Picts as Scottish? I am saying if we were to just overhaul our traditional understandings of Scottish history and rewrite it based on the evidence that has emerged since traditional origin stories were conceived and solidified in the minds of the average Scottish person.

Not on Wikipedia, I understand the rules and limits of this site regarding external sources, but I am asking for your personal opinion.

I would be thinking between the times of Bridei I (554) and Oengus I (732), Oengus I is when it really starts taking shape with the establishment of Saint Andrew cults and Cennrígmonaid. However since the tribal confederation has already taken place before Oengus, and presumably before Bridei I, Scotland effectively already exists, even if at times divided and embroiled in periods of civil war and strife. Is then the beginning of Scotland really the confederation of the disparate tribes of Caledonia during the time of Roman invasion and short lived occupation?

As much as there seems to be a blurring and melding of the terms Pictish/Scottish, there seems to be an equal blurring of the terms Caledonian/Pictish, to the point where I'm not really sure what the distinction or difference is between Caledonians and Picts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.14.221.1 (talk) 11:39, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

It's normal to use the term 'Scotland' for the realm after c. 900, or at least after Kenneth MacAlpin. Some historians prefer to call it 'Alba' before it includes Lothian, Strathclyde and Galloway, but that I don't like that myself as Alba is just the Gaelic word for Scotland, the two words have meant the same since c. 900. If Broun et al. are correct that 'Alba' was been the term for Pictland (and I must say I don't know if I have an opinion on this any more), then you've got a situation where late Pictland is Alba too; but we wouldn't call that Scotland because 'Scotland' requires that the people have a Dalriadan/Irish and/or Gaelic identity--ironically if we all used Gaelic rather than English this wouldn't be an issue. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 21:25, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

"but we wouldn't call that Scotland because 'Scotland' requires that the people have a Dalriadan/Irish and/or Gaelic identity"

Huh? Based on what, lol? Are we not Scotland today because we all speak English? The English term Scots/Scotland for Scotland came long, long after Gaelic culture had both dominated and declined in the Kingdom of Scotland. I also want to point out that Gaelic culture was deeply ingrained if not the predominant culture of the later Kingdom of the Picts (well before 900, we're talking about as early as Oengus in the 700s) as can clearly be seen from inscriptions on stones, names of kings etc.

While the Pictish areas, as far as we are aware, gradually began adopting aspects of Gaelic culture from Dal Riata, no doubt bolstered and infused alongside their missionizing of Christianity in Pictish territories along with Irish Christians, I don't think it's fair to say Pictland underwent some obliteration of its own culture and changed in any substantial way. We see from stone crosses in Dal Riatan areas that the spread of culture/influence went both ways with elements of Pictish society and culture appearing in Dal Riatan territories even at their height and before their obliteration by the Picts.

To say we became a new entity from Pictland to Scotland simply because a centuries long process of Gaelicization took place... I find this somewhat silly. It would be like claiming that once Germanic languages began to take hold and dominate in Scotland, we became a new entity as well and were no longer Scottish, would it not?


The thing is, it is entirely likely that Pictish areas spoke a sort of hybrid midway language between the older and more conservative Goidelic tongues of Dal Riata and Ireland, and the more Romanized Brythonic tongues of Strathclyde and other areas to its south. Pictish areas lacked structure and an alphabet/writing system. These Goidelic speaking missionaries would have brought this with them alongside the spread of Christianity. So over the centuries, in the same way Scots blended and gradually was replaced by standard English post-Union, it's probably pretty likely the Pictish language slowly just began to adopt what was seen as the more advanced, cultured language of their neighbors to the west as well as Ireland.

But again the entity, the political and societal entity of 'Pictland', the line of kings, and various other aspects remain relatively unchanged right into the later Middle Ages in the Kingdom of Scotland. Languages change, adapt, evolve, as does culture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.16.225 (talkcontribs)

The English term Scots/Scotland for Scotland came long, long after Gaelic culture had both dominated and declined in the Kingdom of Scotland.
No, the term 'Scotland' for Alba is first attested in the early 10th century. Woolf thinks 'Scotland' was the vernacular term for Dalriada. I agree language isn't necessarily all that important, as you say Verturians may have adopted Gaelic before abandoning 'Pictish' identity, but the change of name in English from Peohtland to Scotland c. 900 does indicate that the elite north of the Forth had abandoned Pictish identity and identified as Dalriadans and, thus, as Gaels. Remember, that 'Gaels' (and presumably Picts too) were conceived of as groups of agnatic lineages, primarily aristocratic lineages.
Languages change, adapt, evolve, as does culture.
Indeed, always, as do political and ethnic identities. For a lot of the 18th & 19th centuries a large portion of the Scottish elite believed themselves to be of 'Gothic' origin and happily referred to themselves as 'English'. That went into decline, but all types of political and ethnic identity are constructs that depend on popular belief. As most of the constituent elements sustaining Scottish identity are under some sort of assault today or otherwise in decline, I wouldn't be surprised if Scotland has ceased to exist as a political or ethnic identity two centuries from now. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:38, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

"No, the term 'Scotland' for Alba is first attested in the early 10th century"

Really? That's entirely new information to me, and it's not reflected in any of the Wikipedia articles related to or containing sections about the name Scotland/Scots/Scoti etc. Vernacular term for Dal Riata among whom? Doesn't Woolf also suggest that a Pictish effectively exterminated Dal Riata in the 730s or so? Wouldn't it be rather strange for them to start naming themselves after the petty kingdom to their west that they had destroyed not long before?

I was of the impression Scotland around this time in English sources was being referred to as Albania, Albany and various cognates of this term (there was one rather exotic one in a source about a Scottish slave raid on northern England I think in the year 1000 or so)? And that Scots/Scotland came about several centuries later for the Kingdom of Scotland.

That's an interesting take for an identity which has existed (in some sense or another) since AT LEAST around 900, give or take. What do you think it will be replaced by?

And by the way, what are your opinions on Dal Riata or at least the Goidelic culture that emerged there at some point and its origins. Do you buy into the traditional narrative of an invasion/migration/colonization from Ireland theory? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.16.225 (talkcontribs)

It's in his 'Reporting Scotland in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle', which you can find on academia.edu (if you don't have an account the articles are often still readable via an iphone/ipad). Who knows what will replace it. It might depend on whether Anglicization continues faster than Americanization, but probably will be that people simply lose reason to identify as Scottish and so stop identifying as Scottish (where/who are the Prussians?). It might that ethnicity ceases to be important (Scots with be like the Oregonian and Rhineland-Palatinate 'people') or there's some change that means people in what's now Scotland end up identifying with some administrative division of google or a Chinese governership! Who knows. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 20:03, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

No, no. I will take your word for it, I just was surprised to hear this, I had never come across this theory before.

Well there's still a lot of Prussian legacy in areas where the region/state existed, to say the idea of Prussia is dead or forgotten in these areas is not entirely accurate, and it was a very short lived state (at least as a sovereign state, before this it was the Holy Roman Empire, which is a beast of its own entirely) anyway, right? I would also note that Prussians were always German... the concept of Germanness being intrinsically linked with language is one that has existed in German speaking areas for a long, long time, no? I mean even in Austria (an entity which was never part of a pan-German state) the idea that they are distinct from other German speaking areas is... somewhat a new and emerging one. The concept of them being Austrian as opposed to German is rather new.

This same concept does not exist in the modern English speaking world. English is not intrinsically linked with ethnicity or culture, and its link to ethnicity/culture becomes fainter every generation as the language becomes more and more global.

The thing is, Scotland was 'Anglicized' centuries and centuries ago but the language fragmented from English and took its own distinct form. The same happened with Goidelic languages too. Today of course everything is different with mass media and globalization, assuming this is the new permanence. However, this puts the culture Anglicizing us at just as great a risk as every other culture. Everything's changing, as it always has done, just at a faster pace. But the concept of Scottishness has somehow existed and survived monumental cultural, linguistic, societal and political changes in the past, for over 1000 years, so I don't see why it would die out anytime soon, ad 200 years is very soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.16.225 (talkcontribs)


But yeah it's a tough one. Some ethnicities/cultures/societies have survived for... thousands upon thousands of years. Take Israelite/Hebrew/Jewish. Sure, it has changed, sure it has altered etc. But it has existed in some form or another centered around a specific patch of land for... almost 4000 years if not considerably longer. They've also survived repeated invasions/annexations, attempts at cultural suppression/dilution, genocides, mass expulsions, enslavements... God the list really goes on.

Yet somehow the concept of Jewishness, is stronger today than it perhaps ever has been since the days of the Jewish-Roman wars. After thousands of years of wandering and living among other cultures and peoples as minorities, they reforged their ancestral nation into an actual sovereign state that exists today. They even resurrected a dead (outside of liturgical use) language which is now the everyday tongue of millions of people, the world's only successful example of this to date.

It really is impossible to tell what identities will thrive and what ones will die.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.16.225 (talkcontribs)

Prussians were a Baltic speaking people colonized by Germans in the later Middle Ages. The state called Prussia took that name precisely because Prussia was NOT German, the emperor was willing to grant the ruler of Brandenburg the title king of Prussia because Prussia wasn't in Germany (unlike Austria) and thus the kingship didn't conflict with imperial authority. That's my understanding anyway. German Prussians as Prussians are an 18th/ 19th century thing, and today the land is populated by Russians and Polish people, Lithuanians, etc. BTW, why do you put quotes around 'anglicized'? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 21:41, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I did assume you were talking about the German state/kingdom of Prussia since we were discussing polities/peoples dying out or not. Prussia as a region is absolutely in the Baltic, and Old Prussians were not a nationality or organized ethnicity/polity as far as I am aware but a group of disparate Baltic tribes. Balts and Slavs still exist in the area today, just as they did when German crusaders invaded, colonized and adopted the name of Old Prussians for themselves.

And what happened to them was they were mostly killed, driven out to neighboring regions or force assimilated by the Teutonic occupiers. But the idea of Old Prussians as a group of tribes was already not particularly old when the Northern Crusades commenced, only 200 years or so, if I recall correctly.

Oh I put Anglicized in quotes in that specific context because I don't think the Anglicization of Scotland before the Treaty of Union is the same as that which has occurred since then. Since historically it was Scotland annexing large swathes of territory containing English speakers, slowly absorbing them into its culture/society over the centuries and eventually being dominated by it while inflecting it with a distinct local flavor.

The Anglicization of Scotland in the past was really significantly more similar to the Gaelicization before it. The Treaty of Union Anglicization is a constant, concentrated stream of culture from hierarchically superior entity within an asymmetrical union.

I hate to use such politically charged terms like colonization, but the Anglicization of Scotland since the Treaty of Union would be more akin to, for example, the Romanization of Gaul or Britannia post Roman occupation.

By the way, how would you feel about officially renaming Scotland 'Caledonia' and its people 'Caledonians'? It was the first and oldest recorded name for the land and its inhabitants, right?

Happy Saturnalia[edit]

Saturnalia 2017 (27235417509).jpg Happy Saturnalia
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:53, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ross Pictish Stones[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Ross Pictish Stones has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:14, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular[edit]

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)[edit]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Hearts[edit]

I'd note that over 8 years after the Talk:Hearts (card game)#Primary topic discussion the DAB page is at Hearts (see Talk:Hearts). Indeed its surprising that the trick was treated as primary given at least that the organ and suit are also common. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:28, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Nice 'uninvolved' close that. Seems like the main reason for the change was that JHunterJ softened his position. As always Wikipedia is about the whims and inclinations of prominent users, not guidelines or policies. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:41, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes JHunterJ originally favoured the trick as primary but based on the consensus agreed to moving the trick away from the base name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:18, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago[edit]

Awesome
Cscr-featured.svg
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:16, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Picts and timing of identity[edit]

Hi Deacon... discussion going on at talk:Picts about timing of pictish identity (or at least the timing of the "pictish period" as an academic construct. I'd like your input if you have time... Catfish Jim and the soapdish 20:40, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

No bother, I added some comments. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 21:50, 2 July 2019 (UTC)