User talk:Portolanero

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

What is this all about?[edit]

Those with my e-mail shall not reply here but direct and please dont drop it or my name here. Otherwise I fear my e-mail could be flooded in the near future.

All here is the real stuff and has no build in failures to prove priority or such like. Originally the intention was to give the German language school of portolan research some more public. WP had no chance to get modern cartometric illustrations. So I decided to give free some of my own work. Because without the graphics people could hardly understand what the whole thing is about.

But by continuing my own research some unexpected results came up and reminded me on the Bibhistor work at the German Wikipedia. I meet him some years ago and (with minor help of others) he presented a plausible solution of the Ptolemy problem. It had blocked my portolan research and I tackled it a long time without success.

His knowledge on papyri, libraries and classical transmission was an eye opener not to find anywhere. It was suggested to bring him to Wikipedia to give him competent co workers and, well, some check too. He was supplied with hard and software and mainly my technical advice. I co worked in creating his graphics. Visual presentation of information is one of my specialties.

The result exceeded any expectations. Two other users brought new evidence that strongly supported him. One was a Greek text that was well known but (deliberately?) wrong translated at the crucial point. As a good catholic Bibhistor never even thought to check an official translation of his church. The other was a book by a German professor of law that gave me very new insight on medieval times. Bibhistor pointed me to direct implications for my portolans.

Now, by putting a lot of my own results to WP I hope other users can point me to neglected maps, books or citations on my subject too. I plan some print publication in the future and have still some work at hand. The portolan research is far from over and I want to concentrate on it. Things related with the Mercator letter, Leonardo or the unrecognized transmissions are interesting but not on my main track. I would like to hear about and contribute but not focus on.

This is stuff for others because Bibhistor may not be able to take on it. He is old and ill and his treatment by most users in the German WP was not like expected and gave him the feeling that his work was unwanted there. Unfortunately he could not be convinced to write about the Library of Alexandria and the Carolingian Renaissance, both he had quite to say something. In 2011 I lost contact with him and had to write the final of some pages without his support. I hope he still will read it.

Someone on portolans and the mentioned related stuff can reach me here - but only on this page here. Drop your e-mail and I may reply. But I request confidentiality on my name and e-mail by the reasons above untill publication. -- Portolanero (talk) 13:26, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Maps[edit]

Hi Portolanero, just thought I'd drop by and point you at Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps in case you had not seen it. You might be interested in getting involved in that? EdwardLane (talk) 17:22, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Will do. -- Portolanero (talk) 17:43, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Noindex templates[edit]

These prevent pages from being shown on Google. It's standard for pages such as yours. I'm not sure they belong in your userspace in any case, but as long as they are there, they shouldn't appear on Google. Dougweller (talk) 13:10, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Portolanero. Couldn't help but notice the links on your user page. Many editors keep drafts of articles they are working on in their userspace - with the intention of getting them ready for mainspace at some point. There is no time limit for such work and no rush. However, you should know that Wikipedia policy prohibits the indefinite hosting of pages that look like articles, per WP:FAKEARTICLE. So perhaps you might want to clarify your intentions for the articles you have linked here. Best wishes - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Where shall I clarify it? -- Portolanero (talk) 20:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
This Talk page is OK. At the moment I'm just asking you informally if you intend the articles for Wikipedia's mainspace where potentially anybody is allowed a hand in editing or improving them. If you are only using Wikipedia as web host for your own work, then unfortunately they will likely be turned over to miscellany for deletion for appropriate action. - LuckyLouie (talk) 23:11, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Not to affront you. But I cant handle here every user who wants to place such a template. Where is the group that can decide to enforce "noindex"? Of course anyone can copy my material. -- Portolanero (talk) 16:44, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry but I will need further clarification in order to direct you to the appropriate venue for your inquiries. Do you intend your articles to be published in the encyclopedia's mainspace where they will be changed, modified, edited, moved, extended, deleted or combined by other users of Wikipedia? You DO understand that Wikipedia is not a free web space for people to publish their personal research, yes? - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:09, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
If someone will copy it all or in part he is free to do so. -- Portolanero (talk) 20:57, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
I am not just talking about "copying". I am talking about changing, modifying, pruning, etc. - LuckyLouie (talk) 21:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
I noted that you put an automatic "noindex" on all my user pages. Who gave you the authority to do this? Please remove it. -- Portolanero (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
It seems like you are not reading the links to Wikipedia policies I've provided for you. Here's one that specifically answers your question [1]. You should also read WP:FAKEARTICLE. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:40, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
We have discussed it without consens and I see no valid point of yours. I now request you again to remove the noindex. And/or bring this topic to an appropriate forum. -- Portolanero (talk) 17:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Portolanero. NOINDEXing of user pages is required by policy, per WP:FAKEARTICLE. The encyclopedia does not wish to be a web host for someone's private content that may not conform to policies such as verifiability, reliable sources, etc. I've tried to be helpful, but I don't think you understand Wikipedia policies. I'm not sure what "forum" you want, but you can take it to WP:AN/I if you feel that you are being somehow mistreated - LuckyLouie (talk) 21:26, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
I will not accept a noindex and removed it. I expect you(!) to bring it to the appropriate place for discussion. You are free to use the one mentioned two days ago or let it rest forever. -- Portolanero (talk) 22:58, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Late Medieval contact with America[edit]

Hi Portolanero, thanks for contacting me! I have been interested in early trans-Atlantic voyages, and the portolans are interesting in their own right. I am not sure what 5.2 refers to, as 5 shows as the Literature section when I display it. I am not sure whether Wikipedia is the right vehicle for your work - do you have a web site? Thanks in advance. Jpaulm (talk) 17:00, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I`m shocked that it looked different to you. On my userpage should be:

1. What is unsolved about portolans? The Problem of the Portolan Charts 2. With focus on cartometric: The History of Portolan Research 3. Some info on oldest chart: Carte Pisane 4. The portolans of the North and the relation to the southern portolans: "Caerte van Oostlant" 5. The most important portolan and the transmission map: Pizigani 1367 Chart 5.1 Cartometric Analysis II 5.2 The Maps of King Arthur? 6. A crucial issue: The Ptolemy Problem 7. The root origin: Traces of a Classical Portolan World Map And how the survey was done and the role of the Secret Courts. 8. Synopsis - Timeline Literature (And four Supplement articles.)

Sorry to go in such detail, but I think I have to fix something if it looks different to you. -- Portolanero (talk) 20:59, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Looks fine now - thanks! Jpaulm (talk) 14:35, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents here[edit]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:16, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is now over and deleted but can be seen here. -- Portolanero (talk) 19:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Deletion discussion at Miscellany for deletion[edit]

There is currently a discussion at WP:Miscellany for deletion/User:Portolanero/subpages regarding your userpages. Thank you. - LuckyLouie (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


Sorry it took a while to write back. Looks as though your impressive collection of material has drawn considerable attention. I'd suggest that much of this material would contribute a lot to the Portolan chart page if you restructured it in that way. Some of it might also be appropriate for the Terra Australis page.

The question of how much of the Earth's surface was known when ... even long before the early Greeks ... is a fascinating one. There's little question that ancients knew much more than we've given them credit for. Prime example:Göbekli Tepe. It's entirely possible that Polynesians had explored much of the South Pacific long before recorded history, and that some of the portolans reflect those, or Chinese, or Incan explorations as yet undocumented. Materials you put together here might even further such investigations, in time, if your cites are sound; I know little on the subject but would certainly welcome a very thorough Portolan page. Twang (talk) 05:43, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Portolan research is divided in two schools. The English language school dominant by historians that favors a medieval origin. The Swiss/German school I belong is dominant by scientists that favors a Roman time origin. I have good relations to people of the English school. They would rightly see it as an affront if a proponent of the Swiss/German school took over the English WP article. So I have abstained on edits there.
My hope was that someone would come and try a synthesis of both schools in the article. That way I hoped to find new information too. I explained my intentions in the recent deletion discussion here. Unfortunately nobody came to carry out this hard task. I was to wait for longer but the enforced "noindex" exclusion of Google ended this option here. Save what you can. -- Portolanero (talk) 19:45, 23 February 2013 (UTC)


This is my answer for the message you left at Talk:Out-of-place artifact. I read the discussions and the consensus against maintaining your work in your userspace. Right now I have no idea how much of it is fringe, but a priori I think much of your work could greatly enrich several current Wikipedia articles. How you done some research on it? But if you would like to present your whole corpus, then maybe you should think of your own website. Good luck! --Againme (talk) 15:12, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

The purpose of this pages was not to publish it. But to support a way to further enhance the knowledge about it. To use the WP articles and talk pages to bring up new or forgotten facts from old or none English books. What I found about the Inventio Fortunata was just one such example. -- Portolanero (talk) 17:25, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
No idea what the Inventio Fortunata is... but I still think that some of your work could make up entire sections of current articles. Greetings. --Againme (talk) 17:33, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
The Inventio Fortunata is a lost medieval book about a voyage to Greenland and North America from 1360 to 1364. It had a role in Columbus discovery of America. I was offering material to the Inventio article, see its Talk Page. -- Portolanero (talk) 19:51, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Oh! Yes, yes. I'm a social historian, never digged much in it. Just for the sake of curiosity, are you aware of any data pointing to an Old World discovery of the Americas previous to the one by Bjarni Herjólfsson in 985/986? --Againme (talk) 12:23, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
From archaeology this one. -- Portolanero (talk) 18:19, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I knew that one from the OOPArt article. I am sorry they deleted your material here in Wikipedia. --Againme (talk) 23:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


Hi Portolanero, I have found some of your contributions very interesting in the past but now I see that all your user pages seem to have been deleted from here and from Commons. Is there another project or website where they can be accessed? --Hispalois (talk) 22:27, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

You can still access them here but unfortunately you need prior action by administrators. If you contemplate to improve WP after reading it they will undelete them for some time. You can copy and save them to wherever you want. I have no other project or website yet. I intend to go in print and wider public with similar but more material on the subject. The date is still in the future because I have to cure some heart problem before. I hoped to gain more relevant information by other WP users but that did not materialized yet. -- Portolanero (talk) 11:36, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Origin of medieval sea charts[edit]

Hello Portolanero, I suppose you already saw this: [2] Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 13:14, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

No, I did not know it. Thank you very much for the link. I only found this larger abstract. Would like to read his work but it seems the pdf is restricted till Sept 3rd. -- Portolanero (talk) 22:00, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

The longitude of the Mediterranean[edit]

Hi Portolanero. I think this article may be of interest to you: The longitude of the Mediterranean throughout history. -- (talk) 07:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)