- 1 Please add new messages/topics using "new section" button (above)
- 2 You've got mail!
- 3 Catherine the Great
- 4 File jamming
- 5 Catherine II, Empress of Russia
- 6 ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
- 7 Your comment lighted my day
- 8 hey Haploidavey
- 9 A kitten for you!
- 10 Please accept this, my first ever Barnstar
- 11 You've got mail!
- 12 Article on Cambrige UP
- 13 Merry Christmas and happy holidays!
- 14 Phosphate analysis in archaeological sites
- 15 Thanks Bozo
- 16 Stop vandalism my work
- 17 Macedonia (ancient kingdom)
- 18 Disambiguation link notification for March 10
- 19 Zagreus edits
- 20 A barnstar for you!
- 21 Cyamites
- 22 british berrichon
- 23 ygm (Questia)
- 24 Talk:Africa on Jimbo's page
- 25 Pocahontas
- 26 Ludus Dacicus
- 27 Help with proposed move
- 28 Question about source for Augur
- 29 Need sources?
- 30 Image of Roman soldier ... or not?
- 31 Oswald Foundation
- 32 Thanks for the welcome!
New Romulus and Remus Article
Hi, I have been working on a revised R & R article. You're the first to whom I've shown it. What should I do next? I'd like feed back/help. Also, don't hesitate to tell me it sucks and to forget about it :-)Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 19:43, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if you saw the current draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:InformationvsInjustice/sandbox1 which I might have moved since I posted the original message asking for your input. Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 21:00, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
- Oh, and please see my response to your comments. thanks Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 21:01, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Catherine the Great
Thank you, I included a source from reliable historian Norman Davies in A History of Europe who believes she ordered the assassination. Many historians find her participation undeniable. Ctmuva2000 (talk) 23:03, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, this is my first attempt at editing, I appreciate your feedback. I still find it highly likely that she ordered the assassination, in addition to the arrest, and I believe many historians concur. I appreciate your expertise on the subject. Just thought I might be able to contribute in a small way! Ctmuva2000 (talk) 00:23, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello! Thank you for your reply. Like I say, I am new to the editing process. This just seemed like a logical place to begin because I had always believed she ordered the assassination. Norman Davies says explicitly in Europe: A History that she was responsible, so I know at least one reliable historian believes she was complicit. I believe Wikipedia is a valuable resource and I appreciate your contribution! Ctmuva2000 (talk) 20:30, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Greetings! There is a user trying to circumvent the consensus against file jamming . He's already at 3RR. Could you please keep an eye on it? Cheers-- Soupforone (talk) 16:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
- Haploidavey you have remove photos and editing captions that had been present for more than three years with ridiculous reasons--Sennaitgebremariam (talk) 13:27, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Catherine II, Empress of Russia
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Your comment lighted my day
Thank you for extending your appreciation for my edits to the Chernobyl accident article. It was entirely unexpected. Such words of support give me reason to stay in what is usually a very bemusing and difficult to understand atmosphere of interacting with other editors, who in very many cases, have axes to grind. In respect to Chernobyl, I am still very skeptical about much that has been written about the calamity, as it is rare to find someone without an incentive to down-play, or as is more frequently the case, exaggerate its effect.
I suppose that may always go with the territory in the weird and wonderful world of nuclear matters. Sifting thru opinion-piece after opinion-piece to try and find some truth, can indeed be exhausting.
In any case, I'm glad someone informed me that my efforts to uncover the truth of the accident have been warmly appreciated.
Hoping you receive this belated msg in outstanding health,
Ok, I see your point, I will create a page regarding the research later, try to be as neutral as possible. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex981202 (talk • contribs) 15:16, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Hi! Thank you for your feedback! I'm still learning so any feedback is good. I couldn't see any page numbers on the article itself so it was hard to say. All I know is that it was under the introduction.
Please accept this, my first ever Barnstar
|The Guidance Barnstar|
|For invaluable help in editing Romulus and Romulus and Remus Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 05:42, 11 December 2016 (UTC)|
You've got mail!
Article on Cambrige UP
Hi. I've seen that you've got an access to Cambridge University Press Ressources. Could it been possible to send me the pdf of an article that I find in a Journal on this site ? This is this one. I can't get it in a university library or other library near from my home, so it would be a great help. You can answer me by sending me an email, I will answer you quickly. Thanks very much. Mel22 (talk) 14:50, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for your answer. No problem, I can wait. Thanks a lot. Mel22 (talk) 16:51, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and happy holidays!
I ran across this a few days ago by accident. The source and creator might sound familiar to you. :-) But I think it's copied from here] and I'm considered deleting the page. But I'll wait if you want to use it for evidence. Doug Weller talk 17:37, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- That was well-timed! I didn't figure out the source for Sassa - but then, this is very much your speciality, so I forgive myself... The suspected sock (see how careful I'm being!) has left quite a trail of dubious sources behind them, peppered throughout Balkans-related articles; most of which have (unsurprisingly, perhaps) always suffered a tendency to whacky, fringey and generally non-encyclopedic input. I've a mind to check all their contributions, and delete any material they've added to articles using the same or similarly dubious, non-RS and other sources not yet investigated. There seem to be plenty - likewise for the suspected sockmaster and their proven socks. Could you advise me on whether this would be a right/proper thing to do? Haploidavey (talk) 10:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
- PS - per your links, yes, please hold off the deletion for a bit. The article creator seems to have made no effort at all to brush away the traces of outright copy-pasting from Wipikedia or elsewhere. Sassa's material seems to be GNU-licensed; am I right in assuming that automatically qualifies it and any derivatives as an unreliable source? From Sassa itself - "MediaWiki is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE". (Tut, no need to shout). I guess that answers my question. Haploidavey (talk) 10:59, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
|Leave my work alone|
|Thank you ConstantinVacheron (talk) 15:38, 6 January 2017 (UTC)|
- Not at all. Thank you. Perhaps you'll respond to the sockpuppet allegation? Haploidavey (talk) 15:44, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Stop vandalism my work
|Stop calling me a sockpuppet|
|I am a university lecturer, many years ago previous|
- I've not called you a sockpuppet. I've alleged that you might be, based on your editing pattern. The allegation is supported by evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mkd07. Please respond there, thank you. Haploidavey (talk) 16:05, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi Haploidavey! Long time no see. How are things going with you? I just got another article passed as a successful GA candidate: Macedonia (ancient kingdom). Hopefully somewhere Philip II or Alexander the Great are smiling down on it, you know, if ghosts are privy to the digital world (perhaps only the "ghosts in the gears" have that sort of access). Pericles of AthensTalk 18:19, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
- Hey, very nice to hear from you! I've been watching your t-page and following your progress quite closely, here and there. You seem to be blessed, somehow, with a robust editing constitution; viz that you managed to develop that article and survive! So many have been drawn unwittingly beyond reach of daylight or reason by the bottomless, voracious swamp-demon of the Balkans. Seriously, amazing work you've done on the article.
- And who'd have guessed, but my two delightful pupeteer's awards (immediately above) were given by a committed Balkaneer-cum-puppeteer! Great fun, and prone to inventing sources from nowhere... for some reason, the reliable sources noticeboard doesn't address the possibility that a source might be non-existent - it only deals with use/misuse, main/fringe and reliability issues. Tuh!
- Speaking of mires and whatnot... on Saturday I very stupidly drove my car into a grassy swamp, not figurative but a proper, wet, slimy and squidgy real swamp, and had to be drawn out with tractor and chains. Fortunately, I cost me nothing (the farmer's a good friend) except my self-esteem, which is now healthily slimmed down to a couple of microns. Hm, I wonder what Alexander would have done? Haploidavey (talk) 18:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Haploidavey! Sorry to hear about your woes, both in regards to Balkan sockpuppets and car accidents involving swamps. Good thing your friend had that tractor! Don't feel too bad; I've been in two car accidents before (one minor, another one pretty bad). Never a fun deal. Just relish in the fact that you were able to squash that sockpuppet pest! Of that I think Alexander would be proud. ;) Pericles of AthensTalk 19:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ficus Ruminalis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lupa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Actually this edit seems to be a copy paste from here, which in turn apparently was mostly copied from the site you mentioned in your edit summary, so definitely a copyvio. Paul August ☎ 13:47, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
- Ta... quite remarkable. The editor seems to have simply substituted one name for the other. I'll ask for a revdel. Haploidavey (talk) 13:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Original Barnstar|
|great contributions! Vanishadans (talk) 21:22, 20 March 2017 (UTC)|
I have been on Wikipedia for a few years now, but have yet to learn how to sign my name and date it. As for the recent edit though, I appreciate your skepticism, and ability to demand credible citations. I am hoping however, that you might be able to tell me if this one is sufficient to support the claim regarding Cyamites
"On the road stands a small temple called that of Cyamites. [Note] I cannot state for certain whether he was the first to sow beans, or whether they gave this name to a hero because they may not attribute to Demeter the discovery of beans. Whoever has been initiated at Eleusis or has read what are called the Orphica knows what I mean." </ref>http://perseus.uchicago.edu/perseus-cgi/citequery3.pl?dbname=GreekFeb2011&getid=1&query=Paus.%201.37.4</ref>
|More puzzled than ever. DEFRA does recognise this breed (see link below to its list of recognised breed breed societies) Messaging you this way as I am uncertain how else to do so! Anyway - appreciate your interest ...
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/584737/ovine-list.pdf Synopticus (talk) 14:13, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
Talk:Africa on Jimbo's page
Thank you for contacting me regarding my image of the ruins of the Ludus Dacicus in Rome. I understand your valid concerns about the image & appreciate the feedback. However, I would kindly request that you restore the image. I have researched multiple reliable sources that all point to the location of the Ludus Dacicus to the exact point where I took the picture. One of the fragments of the Forma Urbis Romae clearly demonstrates that the Ludus Dacicus was located directly between Trajan's baths & the Ludus Magnus, near the Colosseum. I even used Google Earth to pinpoint the location. You are welcome to also use Google Earth to double check my calculations & geographical research. All the ludi were located next to each other, and all of them were located near the Colosseum, a fact that's well documented. A bit of research will demonstrate to you & anyone that the location of the ruins I photographed is the logical geographical location of the Ludus Dacicus. I went there myself & took the picture, after doing objective & accurate calculations, based on multiple maps & sources, to pinpoint the well-estimated location of the ludus ruins. I have no problem with you putting a caption along with my image saying something akin to "estimated location of the Ludus Dacicus" or "possible location of the Ludus Dacicus" if that makes you feel comfortable. The sources are there to support such a statement. Plus, there are no other historical, geographical or any other kind of marker, at the physical location itself or on any internet map, that show some other ancient place located at that precise spot. So I hope you will consider my appeal and allow the image to be published on the Wikipedia article about the Ludus Dacicus, especially when I have valid sources & maps that all point to the same exact spot that I photographed. Thank you for your consideration & best regards! Alex Dacul
Here are references that support my claim that the image I shared with Wikipedia is indeed of the Ludus Dacicus.
Here is a map that again, supports the location of the Ludus Dacicus precisely where I took my picture.
- The-Colosseum.net http://www.the-colosseum.net/games/ludi.htm. Missing or empty
- Imperium Romanum http://www.romanoimpero.com/2010/03/ludus-magnus-palestra-gladiatori.html. Missing or empty
- Nemesis Pro Nobis http://nemesispronobis.forumactif.com/t79-quelques-ludus. Missing or empty
- Gruppo Storico Romano http://lnx.gruppostoricoromano.it/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/ludi_roma.jpg. Missing or empty
Help with proposed move
I've proposed moving Medical cannabis in the United States to Medical marijuana in the United States. My position is that there is no such thing as "Medical cannabis" in the US. Frankly, it's not much of a thing elsewhere. The only reason for the current title is that at some point, for what are no doubt reasonable motives, all pages on WP use cannabis per MOS:CONSISTENCY. To me, arguing for the move is MOS:JARGON, WP:TITLEVAR, WP:COMMONNAME, MOS:COMMONALITY, MOS:STRONGNAT, & WP:IGNORE. It may not be in your wheelhouse, but if you could point me toward any useful essays, policies or discussions, or if you'd like to comment or vote, it would be much appreciated.
I see you added a group of references to this article a few years back, some more self-explanatory than others. However, two listed was given as simply "Brent" & "Britt". Any chance you can remember more about these books/articles than the author's last names? -- llywrch (talk) 19:25, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- Hi llywrch. "Brent" is almost certainly Brent, A., The imperial cult and the development of church order: concepts and images of authority in paganism and early Christianity before the Age of Cyprian, illustrated, Brill Publishers, 1999. ISBN 90-04-11420-3
- The article has "Brett" (rather than "Britt") but this too should almost certainly be "Brent" (same publication as above). I dumped the material into Augur from Imperial cult (ancient Rome), quite some years ago, evidently typos 'n all, and failed to follow it through; I've done little else to the article since. Having been self-evidently careless but of reasonable conscience, I'd check, if I could; but I've lost access to the work - I lived in london then, and had use of the reading rooms and copious volumes at the British Library. My notes were pretty thorough (and accurate) and I still have most of them. Somewhere. I'll check on Tuesday - that'll be the first opportunity this week. Haploidavey (talk) 22:06, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- I really am losing it... The work in question's partly available on Google books; page numbers and content seem to match. In short, yes, it's all Brent. Haploidavey (talk) 22:37, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- Btw, the "Rosenstein" source is; Rosenstein, Nathan S., Imperatores Victi: Military Defeat and Aristocratic Competition in the Middle and Late Republic. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990. Ark.CDlib.org
- Thanks. I thought that might be the case with the first two, but thought it better to ask. BTW, I was a patron of the BL for two weeks back when it was located inside the British Museum. Sitting on the edge of that ocean of printed materials was quite the heady experience. -- llywrch (talk) 23:11, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
I noticed that you're waiting on approval for access to The Cambridge Library at the Wikipedia Library. The Cambridge Library currently has a waitlist due to lack of available accounts. In the meantime, the Resource Exchange can help! We connect content creators with reliable sources. If you need a specific article or passage from a book that you don't have access to, drop by and leave a request. We're happy to help you access paywalled and print sources to the extent allowable by copyright law. Please let me know if you have any questions. ~ Rob13Talk 03:19, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Image of Roman soldier ... or not?
Yeah, I was a little surprised that that's what a Roman soldier looks like, but then I thought I'm not really that much of a classical antiquitarian, and maybe whoever labeled it as such knows more than I do. Or the media got it wrong.
Similarly, if you check the Anand Chowdary wiki page (which is now deleted), it had an achievement listed as "IBM Global Entrepreneurship" with reference to a PR website. I checked that site and turns out that it's a place where anyone can post their own Press Release. More than this, on further checking, that PR didn't even have the word IBM anywhere in it. As you said, I am confident that this is a sandcastle, but a multi-linked one. The Anand Chowdhary page relies of Oswald Foundation page and vice-versa to kind of "validate" each other. It is a really well-thought execution, but too bad, they failed. Oswald Foundation too needs to be deleted and I'll vote for it. Icefolk (talk) 21:02, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome!
Thank you for the welcome! The constructive notes are appreciated.