User talk:Johnbod

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Nohat-logo-XI-big-text.png This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.
Dirty angel from the Monumental Cemetery of Staglieno in Genoa, c.1910

Contents

Template:Did you know nominations/Raheem Kassam[edit]

Johnbod, this nomination has been moribund for over half a month. If you truly wish to pursue it now that the nominator is inactive, please do so, but if you don't, it's likely to be closed soon. The only recent edits seem to be adding in questionable sources that had been removed earlier, such as breitbart.com. Thank you for your attention here. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:27, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I'll let it go. Johnbod (talk) 15:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year[edit]

Hi Johnbod, I hope you have a very Happy and Healthy New Year,
Somehow whilst going on a spamming-spree you were missed so thought I'd come just without the sparkly crap lol,
Anyway have a great new year and enjoy the rest of your day (or the beginning of your day if you're in the UK :)), Cheers, –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 01:06, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 4 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal reliefs (pictured) from c. 640 BC show the king killing lions with swords, spears, and arrows? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:01, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Ctesiphon[edit]

This part of your current revision of Ctesiphon is inaccurate:

During the Parthian period, the city became the capital of Parthia. From 250 BCE to about 226 CE, the civilization was known as Parthia to the outside world (e.g. to the Roman Empire, the Han Empire, and India). It was not called Persia until the Sasanian era. So I suggested using the term Iranian to refer to both Iranian dynasties collectively:

Or alternatively:

Would you be okay with an edit? Telementor (talk) 09:01, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Persia is still the normal term for this period, as previous and subsequent ones. Johnbod (talk) 16:12, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
But the first contact between Iran and China (and arguably Rome) occurred in the Parthian era. Parthia was the first, and the only term by which they referred to the major power in Iran during this period.
  • Under the Han dynasty Iran was called An-xi (= Arsacid; the name of the Parthian dynasty). It took ~470 years before they began calling it Po-ssu (i.e. 'Persia') for the first time.
  • Even if the Romans identified Parthia with Achaemenid Persia, they always used the term Parthia (Regnum Parthorum 'Parthian Kingdom'). For instance, Trajan and Septimius gained the title Parthicus for their campaigns against Iran.
  • I believe the same is true with India with whom they had commercial contacts. Telementor (talk) 09:42, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
And the ancient Greeks? Anyway the important thing is what the bulk of RS in English do. Johnbod (talk) 15:22, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Ancient Greek writers did speak about Parthians as distinct from Persians. This includes Arrian in his Parthica. And also Plutarch who gives an account of the Parthian general Surena in his Crassus. And I am sure the ancient Greeks who were at war with the Parthians, the Seleucids, differentiated between Parthians and other Iranian tribes. Telementor (talk) 11:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Jingdezhen ware[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Jingdezhen ware at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:16, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Sutton Hoo helmet[edit]

Schwede66 00:01, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Concerning the page "Masterpiece"[edit]

I have left a comment on the talk page. Thanks, AndrewOne (talk) 05:07, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Jingdezhen porcelain[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 10 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jingdezhen porcelain, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Jingdezhen ware (example pictured) has dominated Chinese porcelain for over 600 years? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jingdezhen porcelain), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Johnbod. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Wei Liaoweng.
Message added 09:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Yunshui  09:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Johnbod. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Wei Liaoweng.
Message added 09:11, 13 January 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Yunshui  09:11, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

O'Keeffe question[edit]

I hope you don't mind another Georgia O'Keeffe question.

My strategy lately has been to create articles that cover a number of paintings in one article - so far based upon time period.

Now, I am thinking about an article about O'Keeffe's flower paintings, particularly the paintings from the mid-1920s (close-up, sexually suggestive, abstract, intense colors). And, then focus on some of the more notable paintings like Black Iris, Petunia No. 2, etc. But, I'm not sure what to name it and the title should somehow reflect the type of works.

Your insight will be much appreciated!—CaroleHenson(talk) 00:45, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

There are a lot of "series" articles for VvG, like Trees and Undergrowth (Van Gogh series). Take a look at the VvG template at the bottom of the articles - there are a variety of title styles. I'm not sure the OKs are described as a "series", are they? Picasso might be worth a look too. I don't know much about the OKs, but maybe Flower paintings of Georgia O'Keeffe - or is that not specific enough? Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 04:49, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
That's funny, I wrote a lot of the Van Gogh articles about groups of paintings and I think I used "(Van Gogh series)" if there was already an article with the group name. Based upon what you are saying I shouldn't have used "series" in most cases. And undergrowth should not be capitalized. I am wondering if I should leave it, or go about renaming the articles.
My brain sometimes gets a little stuck on choices, as it has with the name of the flower paintings - and I really appreciate your input. The flower paintings are described as a group of works - they are not described as a "series". Instead of "of", I think I have generally used "by". I like Flower paintings of Georgia O'Keeffe. Thanks!—CaroleHenson(talk) 13:43, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Again, it's not an area I'm very familiar with, but I think that at least some of the VG "series" are generally called that - Like Monet ones, which I could also have mentioned. I wasn't suggesting there was anything wrong with the VG titles - has anybody complained about them? Actually I think captitalized "U" is fine too - it would be in titles for individual works. I think either "of" or "by" are ok. I'm glad if this has helped! Johnbod (talk) 18:20, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Oh, good. No, noone has complained about the titles. Thanks!—CaroleHenson(talk) 19:03, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Writers Barnstar Hires.png The Writer's Barnstar
Thanks for creating much-needed articles on Chinese ceramics! They're informative, thoroughly referenced, and beautiful! It's a pleasure to read your articles. Zanhe (talk) 20:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Many thanks! Much appreciated. Johnbod (talk) 03:27, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Dragon kiln[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 22 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dragon kiln, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Chinese dragon kilns for pottery (excavated kiln pictured) ran up hillsides, could be 135 metres (443 ft) long, and could fire tens of thousands of pieces at a time? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dragon kiln. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Dragon kiln), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

That's the most enjoyable DYK I've read in yonks. Very fine work. Haploidavey (talk) 00:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks very much! Johnbod (talk) 15:40, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Swatow ware[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 24 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Swatow ware, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that scholars have been puzzled by a motif in Chinese Swatow ware, where a pagoda is split "almost like a volcanic eruption"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Swatow ware. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Swatow ware), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Schwede66 00:01, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Cavetto[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 25 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cavetto, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that large concave cavetto mouldings feature strongly as cornices in Ancient Egyptian architecture? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cavetto. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cavetto), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Schwede66 00:01, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Just wanted to thank you for your clean up on my post. It did read a little half-arsed. Just recently became interested in celts today and wondered if I could help update/clean up the articles in this area. Any suggestions? Jonjonjohny (talk) 08:04, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Timoclea[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Timoclea at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:44, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Carved lacquerware[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Carved lacquerware at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Andrew D. (talk) 19:20, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

RE: Concerned[edit]

Thank you for your message, Johnbod. The articles on major artists you see on my students' list are only for critiquing and minor editing (e.g. adding a reference). They will work on stub articles only for their actual adding-to-Wikipedia projects. And they will be closely monitored. Best ProfSG (talk) 05:01, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Coromandel lacquer[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 31 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Coromandel lacquer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coromandel lacquer. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Coromandel lacquer), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:30, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Antonio Fantuzzi[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Antonio Fantuzzi at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dahn (talk) 12:06, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Timoclea[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 2 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Timoclea, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that on this day in 1572, Elizabeth I and her court saw a play about the rape victim Timoclea (pictured) acted by London schoolboys? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Timoclea. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Timoclea), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:26, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Giovanni Antonio da Brescia[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 3 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Giovanni Antonio da Brescia, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Giovanni Antonio da Brescia probably made the first print of Laocoön and His Sons, the famous statue excavated in Rome in 1506? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Giovanni Antonio da Brescia. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Giovanni Antonio da Brescia), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:38, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Giovanni Battista Palumba[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 4 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Giovanni Battista Palumba, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the real name of the 16th-century Italian printmaker Master I.B. with a Bird (monogram pictured) was long suspected to be bird-related, but this was only demonstrated in 1936? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Giovanni Battista Palumba. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Giovanni Battista Palumba), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:59, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Art historian Rose Kerr[edit]

I noticed Rose Kerr (Chinese art) getting created and just as quickly deleted by Primefac as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". The Google cache version of the page is still around, and she appears to be an accomplished scholar probably worthy of an article. I was about to ask for it to get undeleted and moved to draft space, then realized that the author Nephets213 has already restarted it as at Draft:Rose Kerr Chinese Art Historian. I thought you might be interested in taking a look.

It can't be easy for a new user to navigate the narrow space between "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion" and "A7. No indication of importance" without falling victim to either one or the other. --Hegvald (talk) 14:13, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Hegvald, I felt the G11 was appropriate because the page was/is essentially a CV ("she's done this, she's done that, she's so awesome"). The lack of sources didn't help either. To be honest I'm glad that it got recreated (because I agree that she's most likely notable), but it definitely needs some more work before it's ready. Primefac (talk) 15:00, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
She's totally notable! But it should be Rose Kerr (art historian). Thanks for letting me know. Johnbod (talk) 16:21, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Once you'be got the article done you can use a hatnote in the Rose Kerr article. I reverted that article since disambiguation in the text may lead to more confusion than it solves (with the exception when both have to be mentioned in the same article such as father and son with the same name); one uses hatnotes or disambiguation pages WP:D.--Erp (talk) 02:07, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
What nonsense! I reverted you back. Once RK 2 is up there should certainly be a disam page, & it can go. Johnbod (talk) 05:01, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
It is not nonsense; once the Rose Kerr historian page is created then the hatnote can be added until then it will be confusing to most readers why a non-notable person as far as they can see (i.e., no wikipedia page) of the same name is being mentioned at all. I've started a discussion on the Talk:Rose Kerr page. --Erp (talk) 05:42, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Benedetto Montagna[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 5 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Benedetto Montagna, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Benedetto Montagna's engravings (example pictured) are rated more highly than his paintings, but he stopped making them around 1523, when he inherited his father's workshop? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Benedetto Montagna. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Benedetto Montagna), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Stonepaste[edit]

Hi, a colleague recently asked me to look at the "fritware" page after I told them that there was no such thing as fritware. Just so you know, on the "fritware" page I'd say that I am the most cited author. My research has shown that this material is not and does not include frit, and "fritware" is a term that seems to be used by people that don't understand technology. Any technologically-aware author uses the term "stonepaste", including Goffer who is cited several times in the first para even though it is a tertiary source. I was thinking of starting a page on stonepaste, but I see there used to be one and it was rolled under fritware by you.

RBJM (talk) 20:02, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

There's no use pretending the term "fritware" doesn't exist. As I'm sure you know, the literature is full of it, though I see the BM and others now prefer "stonepaste", though Grove it seems only partly so. I only acted on a "move request" that had been sitting for 2 years with no one opposing it. See Talk:Fritware "Merger" section. Since both pages said the two terms were alternatives for the same thing, this was correct - possibly it should have been merged in the other direction. Here's the other one before merging. I have only tidied the merge & made other small edits, & have never seen the main refs used. The original main editor (of Is-p) is no longer active, but others are. I will copy this to the article talk page, where more interested editors are likely to see it. Is "Islamic stone-paste" the best title, do you think? Please answer at the other page. 04:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Limoges enamel[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 9 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Limoges enamel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that by royal edict, only members of certain families could be masters in the guild for makers of Limoges enamel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Limoges enamel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Limoges enamel), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Ouch....[edit]

Okay, Meindert Hobbema is just sad. Sad, sad, sad. Ouch. Wish I knew more about painting so I could help... Ealdgyth - Talk 17:35, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

See this, and the history. The version I've restored is the usual poor EB 1911-based mix. Paraphrasing the copyvio version would be a step forward; the sources are good & online. Most bios of this sort of Dutch painter are poor, though Jane23 does a lot on the basic bio info. I'm doing Pieter Bruegel the Elder at the moment - was really poor, with over 1k hits per day. I suppose Hobbema would an easy DYK at this point ..... Johnbod (talk) 17:53, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Antonio Fantuzzi[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 10 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Antonio Fantuzzi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Antonio Fantuzzi's "mildly licentious" etching of Mars and Venus Bathing (c. 1543) probably copies a painting in the six-room bath suite of the Palace of Fontainebleau? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Antonio Fantuzzi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Antonio Fantuzzi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:03, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Why are you deleting my contributions on the Pieter Bruegel article?[edit]

Why are you deleting my contributions on the Pieter Bruegel article? And at the same time stating things that are clearly not true? C.Gesualdo (talk) 17:48, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Because they're, wrong, unreferenced, and contradict all the sources? Which master of Dutch and Flemish Renaissance painting did you have in mind as being as equally significant? Johnbod (talk) 20:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
You state: '[the town Bruegel] does not fit any known place' and you're calling me 'wrong, unreferenced, and contradict all the sources'. You have got to be kidding me? 'Bruegel' is generally viewed as one of the two places (and the most probable one) where he was born. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. Then about the 'most important painter'. Apart from the fact that you can never make such a bold claim, I would say that Bosch is a far more important painter than Bruegel. Then your wrong translation: 'nearby Breda', it doesn't say 'nearby Breda' anywhere in Van Mander. Also your claim (again: without sources) that 'nothing at all is known of his family background'. This is clearly erroneous. In fact his family background clearly point to the town Bruegel in the Duchy of Brabant. If you want to edit things, at least know what you're talking about. C.Gesualdo (talk) 21:19, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Well, do you have any references on any of these points? Grove says: "According to van Mander, Bruegel was born in the village of Breughel near Breda; however, none of the three Flemish villages of that name is close to Breda. Probably van Mander’s statement is a biographer’s commonplace, and he assumed that Bruegel was of peasant origin because he painted peasants. There is, in fact, every reason to think that Pieter Bruegel was a townsman and a highly educated one, on friendly terms with the humanists of his time. Guicciardini, an Italian contemporary of Bruegel’s who lived in Antwerp, was probably more correct when he wrote that the artist came from Breda. Auner (1956) has also argued for Breda as his birthplace, adducing several historical references to support this view. In the register of the Antwerp Guild of St Luke, the painter’s name appears as ‘Brueghels’: the ‘s’ is a regular patronymic suffix in Dutch, whereas a place of origin would be indicated by ‘van’. It may be, however, that an ancestor of Bruegel’s was, after all, born in a village of the same name, which then became the family’s surname." Van Mader says (as quoted in my note "...den welcken is geboren niet wijt van Breda, op een Dorp geheeten Brueghel, welcks naem hy met hem ghedraghen heeft, en zijn naecomelinghen ghelaten." My Dutch isn't as good as yours, I'm sure, but that looks like "near Breda" to me. I haven't seen B en Son mentioned in any of the many books I'm using at the moment. Coming from Breda is not a "family background" - what did his father do? We don't know. Johnbod (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Let's just do this in one place! I'll copy to the article talk - no more here please. Johnbod (talk) 21:29, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Carved lacquer[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 15 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carved lacquer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1782, the Qianlong Emperor enquired "lacquer is cause for ten officials to protest; what if it is also carved?" (example pictured)' You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Carved lacquer), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 10:31, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Just had a read of this after seeing the DYK - nice article, really enjoyed it. Yunshui  14:21, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Meindert Hobbema[edit]

Thanks so much for your fix - I saw it and was just flabbergasted. It was a good idea just to go back to the last good version of the page. I also just noticed this and now I am wondering what else this person has been up to? Seems like a trail of really dangerous editing strategies, up to and including clearing their talk page. Jane (talk) 09:25, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Indeed! Also he did several big edits, followed by some small ones, so on the watchlist the last edit looked very minor. You'll see a section or three up here that it was Ealdgyth who brought it to my attention. I was sure we'd had more than that in the past - I think I'd edited it at some point. Thanks anyway, and thanks for all your work, which I mentioned above! Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 12:37, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Ha ha, missed that, and thanks for the compliment. Yes I think I had noticed this Hobbema take-down somewhere around xmas time and was feeling too ill and shell-shocked to do anything about it. It didn't occur to me to just restore the page to a previous version, which of course makes good sense in the short term. Sigh. Hobbema definitely deserves some wikilove, but there are so many like these!!! I will just be happy if I can get them all straight on Wikidata with all of their paintings - that will make it much more fun to write about them, because the paintings will be all lined up for illustration purposes. Meanwhile, thanks to you too for plugging away at the sum of all art!! Jane (talk) 13:03, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Macedonia (ancient kingdom)[edit]

To the honorable Johnbod, most illustrious of sirs:

This is a formal request of your services of advisement and copy-editing with the article Macedonia (ancient kingdom), which I have recently nominated for Good Article status. Although you may be busy with other projects or concerns in real life, I would be most grateful and personally honored if you could look over this article a bit and provide your expertise, criticisms, or simply your general opinions about what may be lacking or which item(s) may have too much weight or focus. Please consider my offer and know that I hold you in the highest regard among the old guard of Wikipedians, good sir, of which we are now a dying breed and a dwindling few. To be honest, I should have sought your advice in the first place, but I felt compelled to move swiftly on this nomination, before another inevitable bout of nationalist POV edit warring between Greek and Macedonian users. You can see all about that on the talk page, if you so desire, but to sum things up so as not to waste your time, they're chiefly concerned with the wording of one sentence of the lead, whereas I'm concerned with the overall content of the article that I have rewritten and significantly expanded from its original state back in early January.

Whatever your decision, just know that you have my deepest respect regardless.

Yours most sincerely, Pericles of AthensTalk 13:53, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok, soon. "chiefly concerned with the wording of one sentence of the lead" is always the way! Johnbod (talk) 14:05, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Hurray! I'm thrilled by your response. Cheers. - Pericles of AthensTalk 16:07, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

FAC review request[edit]

Hi Johnbod, I'm sort of getting the waterboarding treatment instead of a decent review of the text on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Palais Rohan, Strasbourg/archive1, so I was wondering if you might read the article and give your opinion? That would be very kind - and knowledgeable, too. All the best, --Edelseider (talk) 14:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

The Sock strikes again[edit]

Check this out [1]...Modernist (talk) 23:45, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, please do...it's a case you're involved in. I'll consider this a notification. MereTechnicality 00:52, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to Women in Red's Role Models editathon on Women Role Models[edit]

Please forward this invitation to all potentially interested contacts

Women in Red logo.svg
Welcome to... Role Models meetup and online editathon

Facilitated by Women in Red
Help us to spread the news

  • 8 March 2017: In-person meetup at Newnham College, Cambridge University
    Eleanor Sidgwick by James Jebusa Shannon died 1923.jpg
    AF Mark 1.png
  • Whole of March: worldwide multi-language online edithon for all
  • Focus: Notable women from universities including women's colleges
  • Inform your communities of the need for their support.
  • Contribute in English or in your own language

Apologies for cross-posting and sending in English
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

African Art[edit]

I can see that you are highly decorated and active Wikipedian. I am wondering if you can explain to a newbie (who happens to have a background in academic libraries and in publishing) how it is that entire passages from another published worked can be used word for word in a Wikipedia article without some mention or citation of that work being list. Am I looking in the wrong place for the information that you mentioned about the editors?

Any help would be appreciated. --Librarianhelen (talk) 23:21, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Well you should be used to reading copyright statements and authorship details then. It is the NWE who is copying Wikipedia, not the other way round, as the statement at the bottom of their pages makes clear. This is perfectly legal under our licence, and pretty common. Johnbod (talk) 02:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. My bad --Librarianhelen (talk) 15:10, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Changed death date René of Anjou[edit]

Thank you for your message on my (talk) page. I'd like to offer some explanation. I spotted the erroneous date of death as a result of a project I started last year. You can read about in this blog.
Since starting it, I must have added about 2500 links to the Days of the year pages. However, another consequence of cross-referencing these pages with year pages and biographies is the staggering amount of discrepancies between them. And this is within the English wiki only. See here for an excerpt of the error results. Most errors occur in the Year-pages but sometimes the conclusion is that the date of birth/death in the bio is inaccurate. To reach that conclusion I always compare with other sources, preferably the wiki of the native country of the person in question. I must have corrected dozens of bio's this way the last few months (you can check my contributions). Because of this I noticed that only a minority of the bio's (English and other) use references regarding birth/death dates. That's why I did not feel it was necessary to always add a reference when correcting a birth/death date error.
By the way: I stopped changing corresponding bio's in other wiki's (like the German and French ones). The reason is that wiki's use their own sources. An example is Boniface of Savoy (bishop); my changes got reverted on the German wiki; their Heiligenlexikon states July 14 1270 as the date of death whereas the handbook used by the author of the English wiki says July 18 1270. All this going back and forth between wiki's takes me more than several minutes and the effort is often futile. I'd rather focus on adding historical date-links to Days of the year pages. Regards, Emiel (talk) 23:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I saw some of that; useful work. But it doesn't change the fact that we need references, even if it takes longer. Do you know about Wikipedia:Database reports/Living people on EN wiki who are dead on other wikis? Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
LOL. That's funny (and worrying)! Emiel (talk) 08:24, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Landscape with the Flight into Egypt (Bruegel)[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 28 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Landscape with the Flight into Egypt (Bruegel), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Landscape with the Flight into Egypt by Pieter Bruegel I includes two tiny salamanders, symbols of evil? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Landscape with the Flight into Egypt (Bruegel). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Landscape with the Flight into Egypt (Bruegel)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 12:03, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Léon Davent[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 1 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Léon Davent, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the etchings of Léon Davent include Michelangelo at the Age of Twenty-Three made some forty years after Michelangelo was that age? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Léon Davent. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Léon Davent), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 12:01, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Johnbod. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 17:07, 4 March 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 17:07, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

No, I haven't! Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
You ought to now. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Home Kidston[edit]

Johnbod, the QPQ has been submitted on this DYK, which I think is what you were waiting for to complete your review. Please return there when you can; if you'd prefer not to, I can always request a new reviewer. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:06, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Self-portraits by Rembrandt[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 9 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Self-portraits by Rembrandt, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that there are approaching one hundred self-portraits by Rembrandt in paintings, etchings, and drawings? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Self-portraits by Rembrandt. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Self-portraits by Rembrandt), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 12:02, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited A Man with a Quilted Sleeve, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Knight of Malta (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Alexander the Great miniature[edit]

I think his line of argument is simply wrong. See Talk:Macedonia_(ancient_kingdom)#Medieval_icon_removed for my response, which mentions the article on Muhammad, which you seem to have even commented on in the past in terms of its image use policy. Pericles of AthensTalk 13:47, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm also curious as to which images in the article you consider to be too small at present. Surely that's something that can be remedied right away and I'd like your input on the matter. Pericles of AthensTalk 13:49, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Zingara[edit]

Hi Johnbod, there is actually very little room for doubt about the fact that The Tempest woman was seen as a Romani by Giorgione's contemporaries: [2]. In Italy, the painting is actually also known as La Zingara e il Soldato (http://www.homolaicus.com/arte/tempesta.htm). I think the article is not very good! All the best, --Edelseider (talk) 14:35, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

PS: Of course, the "not very good" article I mean is The Tempest (Giorgione). Looking at the history, it has mostly been written by an author with few contributions in total and who has left Wikipedia a while ago: [3]. It needs a lot of additional work. --Edelseider (talk) 14:47, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

No, most painting articles aren't. At least it's longer than 1.5 lines, unlike many. Johnbod (talk) 14:52, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
I put my money where my mouth is: [4]. Cheers, --Edelseider (talk) 12:14, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for A Man with a Quilted Sleeve[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 16 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Man with a Quilted Sleeve, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the sitter in Titian's A Man with a Quilted Sleeve (pictured) has been thought to be the poet Ludovico Ariosto, a Venetian patrician, or Titian himself? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Man with a Quilted Sleeve. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, A Man with a Quilted Sleeve), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:01, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Rest on the Flight into Egypt[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Rest on the Flight into Egypt at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Edelseider (talk) 20:52, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Royal Society[edit]

The Royal Society is NOT the oldest by any means. Please see the talk before doing your changes. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.245.233.62 (talk) 06:36, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Man of Sorrows[edit]

Hi John, I would appreciate if you could check this "edit", in relationship to the sentence after. I have contradictory sources. Yes I realise the theological complexities and underlying political tides. Not sure how to sum up. Not an easy one, given how we know so little of the specifics of 1440s workshops.. Ceoil (talk) 08:58, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alexander Maximilian Seitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Finding of Moses (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:13, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Sacra conversazione[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 18 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sacra conversazione, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in earlier paintings of a sacra conversazione ("holy conversation"), the figures are rarely shown speaking (example pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sacra conversazione. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sacra conversazione), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

‎Wikiquote[edit]

I wonder if you have read any of the Architecture and Art related books under "The Mughals and their Contemporaries" of The New Cambridge History of India. If yes, Will you be able to start a new Wikiquote article on it? Some redlinks (there) which might interest you include: Vijaynagar, Mughal, Rajput, Deccan, Punjab, Maratha and other q:Category:States of India. Solomon7968 12:43, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Rest on the Flight into Egypt[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 20 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rest on the Flight into Egypt, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Rest on the Flight into Egypt is a popular subject in Christian art, but the earliest known example (pictured) only dates to about 1379? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rest on the Flight into Egypt. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Rest on the Flight into Egypt), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

What's your opinion?[edit]

Hi Johnbod, may I request that you look Talk:Church of Saint Thomas, Strasbourg#Reason for move? What would you do? All the best, Edelseider (talk) 16:02, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

On the medal in Botticelli painting[edit]

Hi I saw you reverted this. I think the sentence is problematic for a bunch of reasons. First, its speculative because it might be like a medal and that medal also might have been made by Donatello. I don't have access to the printed cite, but does it really talk about the medal in relationship to this painting, or is that a connection that editors have made for the purpose of the article? And then there's the issue of that random external link in the body of the text, which doesn't belong. And then there's the fact that the medal, which might be the model, is located at the V&A museum. That's pretty tangential to the article itself. Bangabandhu (talk) 01:57, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Nonsense, from beginning to end! Don't remove sourced material (from a very strong source) from a source you haven't seen, especially in areas you aren't familiar with. You don't seem to understand what the section says. There's no "might be like a medal" - we have the medal and the cast, and they are alike. Johnbod (talk) 03:32, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
If it is the cast, then why qualify the language with "appears" and "possibly"? If it is designed by Donatello, it should clearly state as much. And how does the link fit with WP:EL? Bangabandhu (talk) 23:38, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I didn't write it, & haven't seen Avery. Large numbers of artworks in this period have uncertain authors, especially things like designs for medals which were then cast by specialists. Johnbod (talk) 03:45, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Then what gives you assurance that Avery is being used accurately, especially when the rest of the para leads to a point that is at best tangential to the medal, and the painting? Bangabandhu (talk) 21:00, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
WP:AGF, and the competence of the editor concerned. The question is, what on earth led you to think that just removing referenced material was a good idea? Johnbod (talk) 01:07, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Last Judgment (Michelangelo), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tympanum and Finding of Moses (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Further reading explanation[edit]

Hi John,

You seem to be unsure what the term "Further reading" means[5]. You can see an example here Hyperlexia#Further_reading, amongst many examples on Wikipedia. Cheers Gryffindor (talk) 15:30, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

You really are an idiot! See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Layout#Further_reading and learn from it!

Contents: An optional bulleted list, usually alphabetized, of a reasonable number of publications that would help interested readers learn more about the article subject. Editors may include brief annotations. Publications listed in further reading are cited in the same citation style used by the rest of the article. The further reading section should not duplicate the content of the External links section, and should normally not duplicate the content of the References section, unless the References section is too long for a reader to use as part of a general reading list. This section is not intended as a repository for general references that were used to create the article content. Any links to external websites included under Further reading are subject to the guidelines described at Wikipedia:External links.

You do NOT turn works cited as references into "Further reading". It is typical that the example you point me to has the sections in the wrong order! I shall of course revert trhis. Johnbod (talk) 16:01, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Can I do something for you?[edit]

Hello Johnbod, yes, I start with that honest question because I am once again about to ask for a favour. Gerda Arendt has now reviewed the FAC for Palais Rohan and she supports it. Would you have a look at the article, now that it has been thoroughly polished thanks to the input of three people already? I would be very thankful and indeed if you would like me to review one of your articles (Gerda and I had the same honest arrangement), just ring me up, so to speak. All the best − (art lovers of the world, unite!) − Edelseider (talk) 15:19, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of The Last Judgment (Michelangelo) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:08, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Ping[edit]

You've got mail. ϢereSpielChequers 19:48, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cappella Paolina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sala Regia (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:42, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Citation on ancient Greek art[edit]

I apologize for the fact that the citations I added to ancient Greek art were not in the correct format. I copied them directly from the article archaic smile. I would like to ask what the correct citation style is so that I will not make this mistake in the future. Citation consistency has long been a difficulty for me. As I understand it, Wikipedia is apparently supposed to use a citation style known as "Harvard style." I am totally unfamiliar with this style and have never used it before. I have seen many very different styles of citations used here during my time at Wikipedia and I am not sure which style is correct. For all the citations I have added myself that have not been copied from other articles, I have tried to use the citation templates, but even with these, I am still not sure if I am using them correctly or not. --Katolophyromai (talk) 21:50, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

There is no "correct" style at all, but styles are supposed to be consistent within an article. The great majority of 138 citations in the article use a very simple style with no templates; please follow that. But if a point is already referenced to two sources, there is generally no point in adding another, that neither of us have read. Johnbod (talk) 03:17, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Mérode Altarpiece[edit]

Campbell's JSTOR article really picks apart the triptych (you added it about 8 years ago); he doesn't like that version at all. He is very funny in places...the "shadows and penumbras are everywhere, often annoyingly obtrusive and always irritatingly sharp and wanting in atmospheric quality". Wow. Ceoil (talk) 22:38, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Ophelia (painting) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Charles Dodgson
The Last Judgment (Michelangelo) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Finding of Moses

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Helen King (police officer)[edit]

Johnbod, the nominator has submitted the QPQ that you mentioned was holding up passage of this nomination. Please return as soon as you can to complete your review. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:23, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Papal conclave, 1724 review[edit]

Just circling around on this (was reminded because I did just reviewed another DYK). If you could look it over again whenever you have time, it would be appreciated! TonyBallioni (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 12 April 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Last Judgment (Michelangelo), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Michelangelo destroyed parts of his own Sistine Chapel ceiling to make room for his Last Judgement (detail pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Last Judgment (Michelangelo). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:02, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Dutch Golden Age painting[edit]

Good afternoon, I just noticed I have accidentally double-reverted in Dutch Golden Age painting. By no means it was intentional to start an edit war. However I did not quite get your comment. If it's the main article of a category, why would the article need to be in the grandfather category? Marcocapelle (talk) 18:34, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

See WP:EPON, which is not as clear as it used to be, or should be. It used to be that all eponymous main articles were automatically placed in categories where their eponymous cat was a sub-cat, which is as it should be. This is a problem with a lot of your editing. I think you massively overestimate how much readers are prepared to dig through several layers of sub-categories, or even notice they are there. Johnbod (talk) 19:47, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikimedian in Residence BoF at Wikimania 2017[edit]

Hello!

My name is David Alves (User:Horadrim~usurped), and I'm an Wikipedian in Residence at RIDC NeuroMat (User:Horadrim). I've reach your contact through the Wikimedian in residence page in Outreach. As you may know, Wikimania 2017 is coming! I am here because, as a fellow WiR, I believe this would be a great opportunity for us to share experiences, discuss difficulties and exchange solutions, creating a community among us capable of supporting in other projects that would benefit from residents. In that sense, I have submitted a proposal of a Birds of a Feather activity to Wikimania that you can check out here. I hope to count with your support in this project and would like to invite you to join us if you participate in Wikimania. In case of any doubts, please feel free to contact me, either in my talk pages or by e-mail at david.alves(at)outlook.com.

Thank you very much! ‎Horadrim~usurped (talk) 00:33, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

St Cuthbert Gospel scheduled for TFA[edit]

This is to let you know that the St Cuthbert Gospel article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 30 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 30, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:43, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda! Johnbod (talk) 14:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for today's "earliest surviving intact European book and one of the world’s most significant books"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:34, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Figurines[edit]

As I surmised, she's a student.[6] I don't think the paper belongs, we wouldn't use it as a source. Doug Weller talk 05:30, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Pure Insights is an undergraduate journal.[7] Doug Weller talk 05:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
I still think it is useful as a recent "plague on all their houses" survey of various theories. mr Bobby clearly hadn't read it, which with his command of English is perhaps not surprising. Also sources in English seem to be becoming a bit rare in these articles. I'll leave you to it but they should be sorted at some point. Johnbod (talk) 10:40, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
You've also used it as a source. I really can't see an essay as a source. Doug Weller talk 12:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
For the existence of lots of other theories, that is recent and fully available free. I can't actually source (yet) what Jill Cook told and showed me about holding them in the hand during childbirth. No doubt it's in her book. Johnbod (talk) 12:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vespasian Psalter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frontispiece (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

My DYK? Nomination[edit]

I have now responded to you here: Template:Did you know nominations/Urbanization in the German Empire. Futurist110 (talk) 20:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Revision undo on Bible[edit]

Unfortunately, I typoed the note I made when undoing your revision. I meant that Gutenberg was not the first book printed using movable print...Jikji was. In my opinion, "mass-produced" refers to the methodology used for printing, not to the number of editions printed, but that's open to interpretation. Just thought I should clarify since I messed up the note. Thanks. Jtrevor99 (talk) 17:35, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

"especially in the West, where the Gutenberg Bible was the first book printed using movable type." Is fine. Your opinion on the the meaning of "mass-produced" is not supported by dictionaries or usage (and a copy of a book is different from an edition). Cheers. Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Actually, the dictionary does support my opinion. From Miriam-Webster: "to produce in quantity, usually by machinery". That is what I am saying: "mass-production" connotes methodology as much as it does quantity. The only issue is whether 200 copies is "in quantity". As the use of "in quantity" is itself qualitative, there is no way to establish whether 200 is sufficient. I posit that it is, because producing 200 copies at once would have been considered a massive quantity for the time, especially given prior copy processes.
That said, I admit I did miss "in the West" - not sure how. Therefore, while the original statement that used "mass-produced" was factually correct, so is your modified one, so I won't challenge it further. Jtrevor99 (talk) 20:32, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Article needed Significant expansion and clean up[edit]

Hi, my first edit as an account on this wiki was on the Fertility in art page. The article contains many possible orginally research. I tried to clean up the article to the best of my ability, but I do not know Information about this topic. The article claims the process of the birth of Aphrodite to be an example of fertility and that the Germanic goddess Eustre was surrounded by rabbits, none ofwhich does not provide any refs. I thought of notifiying an admin who has edited this page. Thanks Joshuart (talk) 12:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)