User talk:Ealdgyth/Archive 48
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
bishops and abbotts of 1215
Can I pick your brains and sources again? In the article Magna Carta in the section "List of participants in 1215" there is a "hidden" list which purports to show the "witnesses". There are lots of sources for the 25 barons, but less sources (and more confusion) about the bishops and abbots. This started when Hereford Cathedral spotted the wrong bishops name was being woven into the tapestry of the article being made for the 800th anniversary. Further investigation and long discussions on the talk page suggest that Hereford wasn't even one of the Bishops present. I'm having problems even identifying the correct names for the abbots of the abbeys listed at that time - let alone finding sources to support them being a signatory - any help you could offer or suggest would be appreciated.— Rod talk 11:37, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- The classic work to ID abbots is Heads of Religious Houses, England and Wales - unfortunately for you, you'll need volumes 1 and 2, since the break point between them is1216. That will tell you who the abbot/prior of a particular monastery was if you know the name of hte monastery. I have both books, if you need access to them. Bishops you can find at http://www.british-history.ac.uk/catalogue/religious under the Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae ... which is pretty much the definitive work on ecclesiastics post Conquest. I also have access to the Handbook of British Chronology's newest editon, which carries lists of the bishops (along with other officials), but without the supporting documentation that the Fasti has. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:37, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- Brilliant - I will start searching the BHO copy of Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae - which will tell us who was in post at the time but there seems to be a mix of the 1215 & 1225 versions within our article. Presumably it will not tell us who was a witness to the sealing of Magna Carta? Another little problem I think I've found is a hoax (from 2006) adding the Abbot of Hartstary Abbey (or Harstary) - I can find no evidence of this abbey at all.— Rod talk 13:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- Heads lists no such abbey or priory or nunnery. No, the Fasti usually won't mention Magna Carta, but it's always possible. Once you know who was in office, you could then consult their ODNB biography to see if MC is mentioned there. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, and I have access to the printed Fasti for the Norman bishops, if you're interested. I think it stops at 1204, but the biographies there are a bit more complete than the English ones, and they continue past 1204 for anyone who was in office then. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:05, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- I've started with the bishops we do not have citations for. On this page for Salisbury I see for 1215 Herbert Poore (le Poer) alias of Ilchester, but below that "M. Richard Poore Dean ; bp. of Chichester, cons. at Reading 25 Jan. 1215" but the abbreviations etc are a bit beyond me (yet). On this one for Ely I see Robert of York, John of Fountains, & Geoffrey de Burgh all around that date. If you can make sense of the "readings" "temps" "royal assent" etc that would be great.— Rod talk 14:20, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- Hugh of Northwold is described here - "It cannot be a coincidence that King John acknowledged Hugh’s appointment five days before agreeing to Magna Carta and that Hugh is listed as a witness to the document" however his ONDB article has him as a witness in 1253. My head is beginning to hurt with the inconsistencies and lack of records for all this.— Rod talk 14:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- Brilliant - I will start searching the BHO copy of Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae - which will tell us who was in post at the time but there seems to be a mix of the 1215 & 1225 versions within our article. Presumably it will not tell us who was a witness to the sealing of Magna Carta? Another little problem I think I've found is a hoax (from 2006) adding the Abbot of Hartstary Abbey (or Harstary) - I can find no evidence of this abbey at all.— Rod talk 13:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- "Can. (unident. preb., list 66). Archdcn. of Canterbury (1 Fasti II 14), can. of Lincoln (ibid. III 127-8), can. of Wells (cf. HMC Wells I 52, as 'Hubert'). El. and received royal assent shortly before 29 Apr. 1194, when conf. by abp. and received temps. (Diceto II 116; cf. PR 6 Ric. I p. 256). Ordained pr. 4 June, cons. at Westminster 5 June, enthr. 12 June 1194 (Diceto II 116; cf. Gerv. Cant. I 527). Went to Scotland 1209, during Interdict (see Interdict Docs. pp. 4-6 and references cited). Restoration of temps. after Interdict 18 July 1213 (Rot. Litt. Pat. I 101a). See vacant by 6 Feb. 1217 (Rot. Litt. Claus. I 297a). Commem. 7 Jan. (Sar. Stats. p. 3). So prob. d. c. 7 Jan. 1217." translates: "Can." means "canon". "unident. preb. list 66" is "unidentified prebends on list 66". "Archdcn. of Canterbury (1 Fasti II 14)" is "Archdeacon of Canterbury (vol. 1 of the Fasti list 14). "can. of Lincoln" = "canon of Lincoln Cathedral". "El. and received royal assent shortly before 29 Apr. 1194, when conf. by abp. and received temps. (Diceto II 116; cf. PR 6 Ric. I p. 256)."= "Elected bishop and got royal approval shortly before 29 April 1194 when he was confirmed by the archbishop of his archdiocese and received the temporalities." "Ordained pr. 4 June, cons. at Westminster 5 June, enthr. 12 June 1194"="Ordained a priest on 4 June, consecrated as a bishop at Westminster on 5 June, enthroned as bishop at his cathedral on 12 June 1194". "Commem. 7 Jan. (Sar. Stats. p. 3). So prob. d. c. 7 Jan. 1217"="His death is commenorated at Salisbury on 7 January so he probably died around 7 January 1217". http://www.british-history.ac.uk/fasti-ecclesiae/1066-1300/vol4/xx has all the abbreviations. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:40, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- Has anyone checked the relevant volume of English Historical Documents - I know there is a translation of MC in there (if there isn't, the editors need to be shot) but it may list the signatories also. Also check genealoigical sites- there is a genalogical society of descendants of Magna Carta sureties, which may have relevant info. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:52, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:17, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Adam Matthew
Hello Ealdgyth,
You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Adam Matthew through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:
- Please make sure that you can still log in to your Adam Matthew account. If you are having trouble let me know.
- Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, to include citations with links on Wikipedia. Links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
- Do you write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let me know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.
Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thank you, Wikipedia Library Adam Matthew account coordinator HazelAB (talk) 13:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Invitation to comment on VP proposal: Establish WT:MoS as the official site for style Q&A on Wikipedia
You are being contacted because of your participation in the proposal to create a style noticeboard. An alternate solution, the full or partial endorsement of the style Q&A currently performed at WT:MoS, is now under discussion at the Village Pump. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Authority control?
I have never really understood what authority control does, anyway? Can you enlighten me? Montanabw(talk) 18:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- LIbrarian thing. Basically, it's a way to verify that the John Smith in one context is the same John Smith in another context. Several different systems appear to actually exist - but it's a way to assure yourself that any specific entity (person/animal/mineral/object) etc. is the same across various cataloging/etc schemes. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- Right, but how does our template work? Seems quite generic... and on horse articles...? (Wondering if I'm supposed to be doing this...) Montanabw(talk) 22:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- It pulls from Wikidata ... so presumably they'll populate things there. I mainly added it to keep the bot from screwing up the formatting in the edit window (I hate how the AWB/bots squish all the templates together so you can hardly read them). You can let the bots do it also. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:40, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- Right, but how does our template work? Seems quite generic... and on horse articles...? (Wondering if I'm supposed to be doing this...) Montanabw(talk) 22:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day
|
Happy First Edit Day, Ealdgyth, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Anastasia [Missionedit] (talk) 04:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC) |
Very fun collaboration
Hey Ealdgyth, we are having a wonderful group of contributors over at American Pharoah, and would value your expertise on RS at American Pharoah#Pedigree - we have good info but want to be sure we are using "good enough" RS for GAN. See also the talk page. I am so happy to have a friendly and collegial group working on that article and wanted to invite you to pop by because I know you have the background in this area to be of tremendous help, particularly to the editor who is doing the most work on the pedigree section. Thanks. Montanabw(talk) 20:07, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
- I'm only so-so at TB pedigrees. QH peds are where I'm the expert. I'll try to pop over later .... but I make no promises. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
TPSs ...
Can anyone get me this article? Ealdgyth - Talk 14:13, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
- You have mail. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:34, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:47, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Stephen Langton
Wanted to invite you to discuss the issue of where Stephen Langton was from. [[1]] Regards ClarkEllis (talk) 16:10, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:58, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations
There is an RfC that you may be interested in at Template talk:Infobox country#RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations. Please join us and help us to determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:10, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Reference sections
I'm not saying you're wrong that the MOS has a guideline saying not to use semicolons. I'm sure they make plenty of mistakes. All the same, MOS:SECTION doesn't say anything like that, so kindly provide a link to the actual policy you're citing so I can avoid formatting that people will have to clean up. — LlywelynII 11:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility specifically under Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Headings where it states "Do not make pseudo-headings using bold or semicolon markup. Screen readers and other machines can only use correctly formatted headings. If you want to reduce the size of the table of contents (TOC), use {{TOC limit}} instead." Ealdgyth - Talk 14:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Anselm
I saw on your user page that you avoid improving his article on general principle so
- a) sorry for luring you in
- b) out of your interest in William, though, do you know off the top of your head why the Red King refused him permission to leave the country in 1092?
You don't have to add the material yourself. Just let me know and I can poke around for some sources and add it in for you. — LlywelynII 12:04, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- A quick look at Barlow's William Rufus index doesn't show Barlow speculating on the subject (at least nothing that I could see on a quick check.), Mason in William Rufus pp. 104-109 discusses the situation that led to Anselm becoming archbishop, but does not say that William detained Anselm, merely that Anselm stayed in England long after his business was done. "Anselm's extended stay in England, long after he had attended to the interests of Le Bec and those of Earl Hugh, created the impression that he had something else on his mind." (p. 106). Vaughn's biography of Anselm discusses the events of late 1092 and early 1093 on pages 123 and following, where she doesn't really fall for Eadmer's tale-spinning. (Note of COI - I studied under Vaughn at college so I'm not a totally disinterested observer, which is one reason why I don't touch Anselm's biography - I have definite ideas on the question of Anselm .. and they fall squarely on Vaughn's side, rather than Southern's. It's a bad idea for me to be editing his article.) Southern discusses the events of 1092-1093 in Anselm: Portrait in a Landscape pp. 186-194 (and probably elsewhere). Hope this helps get you started. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- I do try to keep absolute nonsense out of Anselm's article and revert vandalism. I just don't think I am capable of being disinterested enough in the great historiograpical argument on Anselm - was he a saint or was he a cunning politician - to be able to write his biography being fair to the side I don't think is right. You will probably need to read both of Southern's biographies as well as Vaughn's in order to do justice to his article.. it's still a "raging" debate (as far as such things go among historians). Glad to see someone is tackling it. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)