User talk:Robth/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Robth, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! . -- Eagleamn 06:31, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Weiping[edit]

Are you sure the corruption was only political? Bo Xilal is the economic minister. KI 23:42, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but clearly economics is his specialty. Do you have a link that supports the disambiguation? KI 23:53, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exceptional newcomer[edit]

I, Renata3, present you, Robth, this Exceptional Newcomer Award for the Long Walls, Battle of Nemea, and Spartiate articles. Wear it with pride and keep up the great work! Renata3 04:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Just don't forget to cite your sources ;)

You are very welcome. And look at you - have already got a customized signature ;D Renata3 20:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind note[edit]

Appreciate the note you left on my user page. I think Epaminondas really is FA quality (at least!). I guess JoaoRicardo doesn't want to look at any of the sources, even the ones available on the web. But I think you've handled his objections very well. Again, thanks for the note. Casey Abell 04:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Epaminondas, and a tip[edit]

I also think the article is great, and I hope you contribute more to Wikipedia. I wanted to let you know something about Wikipedia formatting. I also noticed you often responded to bullet points like this: 

* A comment by someone else
:* Your response
* Another comment
:* Another response

But it works better to use two asterisks together (or three or more) for indented bullets. Like this: 

* A comment by someone else
** Your response
* Another comment
** Another response
*** Further nesting

That ends up looking like this:

  • A comment by someone else
    • Your response
  • Another comment
    • Another response
      • Further nesting

This allows multiple nested bullet points of various levels. It also works with numbered points (using the # instead of a *), and it keeps the numbering. Just a tip, – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 17:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Epaminondas[edit]

I can copy edit Epaminondas when I get off work. I'm sending myself an email reminder, but knock on my talk page if you don't see any activity sometime in the next 24 hours. Cheerio! :) jengod 19:22, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Epaminondas layout[edit]

As I suggested on the featured articles candidates page, I think putting info about the historical sources on Epaminondas at the front of the article is a great idea. I like the changes you've made to the version of your article at User:Robth/sandbox. I think you should "go live" with those changes, so to speak. Hydriotaphia 06:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Epaminondas copy edit[edit]

All done. Feel free to revert anything you loathe or that doesn't jibe with your national grammar. I'm a murrican. :) My only other thoughts involve pictures. It's a very well-written and interesting article, but most people without knowledge of ancient Greece are going to be at least a little lost. (I tried to solve some of those issues with my edits.) Anyway, as many faces as you can put to names would be great. If there are pics of any of his allies or enemies or opposing generals, I think they would be very useful enhancements. Further on that front, from a strict historicism standpoint, it would be awesome if you could include more information on the page about the current illustrations. When was the frieze of the death of Epaminondas made? Is there any information about a creator? Where is it now, i.e. in which museum or collection? I think that's a nice added layer of context. Good luck, and hope I helped! :) jengod 09:03, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Welcome![edit]

This user is a member of
WikiProject Military history.

Hey, I noticed you joined Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history and just wanted to roll out the welcome wagon for a new member who obviously has much to contribute. Sapere Aude!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 17:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aegospotamai/Aegospotami[edit]

Hi, I saw that you created Battle of Aegospotamai, so I thought you would like to know that there is already an article about that, at Battle of Aegospotami. You should probably merge your article into the older one. Adam Bishop 14:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mindarus[edit]

No problem at all... on further reflection, I think you're right: that categorization is better.

WikiProject Military history: Coordinator elections[edit]

WikiProject Military history The Military history WikiProject is currently holding elections for project coordinators. Any member of the project may nominate themselves and all are encouraged to vote here.
The elections will run until February 5.

--Loopy e 04:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for reverting my user page after some other guy hosed it. I didn't even notice until today. --geekyßroad 13:05, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the kind note about Henry James finally making it to the FA Valhalla. It was a struggle. At least I didn't have to add 10,000+ words on The Portrait of a Lady. As for appearing on the front page, I'm a little hesitant. I've heard too many stories about about articles on the page getting vandalized. Yesterday, believe it or not, somebody vandalized my article on The Spoils of Poynton. Again, thanks for the note and your help on the article. Casey Abell 17:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources on Byzantine authors?[edit]

Hi, I saw you said you were equipped for obscure references searches about Greek topics, right? Does that also apply to Byzantines? If you're interested, could you have a quick look at the disambiguation problem at Michael Psellus, please? Michael Psellus the Younger is quite prominent and well sourced. Michael Psellus the Elder is an article based on the 1911 Enc. Brittanica. Trouble is, the Enc.Br. gives no sources in turn; it also states that no writings of that guy have been preserved, so how do we even know he existed? He is in none of the more recent works I've checked - the present version of Enc.Br., Pauly's Reallexicon, a couple of other general-purpose encyclopedias. Nothing in the specialist literature on the "younger" Psellos either that would suggest the existence of a confusable namesake. What makes the whole thing even more fishy is that much of the information the article gives on the "elder" (except his geographical provenance from Andros) sounds almost as if it could also apply to either of the other two Psellos, so I have the suspicion his whole existence might be a philological misunderstanding that has in the meantime been solved by scholarship. Does your library have anything where you could look up a topic like this? Lukas (T.|@) 09:12, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks, that was helpful. Do you mind if I move my question and your reply to the article talk page too? Oh yes, and since you just invited me: what does your dictionary have to say about Brychon? :-) Lukas (T.|@) 20:59, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Forget about Brychon, I found it myself. Lukas (T.|@) 21:46, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, today's my detective day. I've solved the Psellus mystery too. We were both right. :-) Lukas (T.|@) 00:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Holmes[edit]

Greetings! You have edited the Katie Holmes page in the past. I've completely reworked the article and have posted it on WP:PR in the hopes of advancing it to WP:FAC. I would be grateful for your comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Katie Holmes/archive1. PedanticallySpeaking 18:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Stop messing with my discussion page! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.215.238.4 (talk • contribs) .

Kirby[edit]

Congratulations, Mr. Robth. I actually read the article in full a few minutes ago for the first time as a means of further procrastination. Good stuff. Mgummess 05:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Epaminondas as article of the day[edit]

Congrats on getting the article on the Main Page. Unfortunately, this has attracted idiot vandals, but they're getting reverted pretty quickly. Casey Abell 13:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isambard Kingdom Brunel[edit]

Thanks for your objective comments on Peer Review - I'll post back on that particular page when I believe I've addressed them all (working on it at the mo) Cheers! --PopUpPirate 00:08, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much implemented all your comments, no-one else replied so I'm gonna submit it to FAC - thx again! --PopUpPirate 01:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Fellow's Safari Planet[edit]

I find it incredulous that you feel the need to discount the fact that there are penises everywhere. The WPdc system was created to alert people to this fact. --mitrebox 06:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm glad you were able to see the humor in my dc3 edit. While the edit was mostly harmless, it could be considered as vand by some. I hope my alert was able to peovide the wpdc system with the proper sarcaism and disdain it so righly deserves. --mitrebox 17:41, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sassanid[edit]

Hi ! Thank you for revising Sassanid article and also your peer review. Could tell me specifically which sections you found most confusing or in a bad shape and which sections are good so I could fix those bad ones ? --Amir85 19:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for copyediting. I really appreciate your help. About the article, I wont nominate it to FA yet, there is two important articles I haven't finish ("Sassanid art" and "Sassanids in literature and poetry"). so Keep on copyediting dude ! --Amir85 6:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
So what do you think of its current version ? does it have any chance to be a FA ? if not could you please tell me which parts are not good enough. -- Amir85 19:21, Friday 3 March 2006 (UTC)

don't be a d*ck at john kerry[edit]

Cut the crap with those reverts. I am not a vandal and I don't like being treated like one 67.15.76.185 14:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Socks of Shran/CantStandYa, apparently the same user. -Will Beback 01:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Message moved from user page[edit]

Hallo Robth.. checking wiki on my school's network and noticed the many ban warnings for this IP (yours was latest). This school isn't, let's say, known for its intelligent students. Rest is up to you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.27.234.20 (talk • contribs)

I'm impressed[edit]

Wow. First you turn an easily-forgotten biography like Epaminondas into a great featured article, and now Thrasybulus? You da man. Could I, perhaps, interest you in Akbar? I have placed a bounty on that one. Or is he a bit too Eastern and modern for your tastes? I also wanted to point you to the bounty on forgotten biographies, in case that piques your interest. All the best, – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 14:16, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for fixing my mistakes![edit]

Just a quick note to thank you for fixing my errors listing "Progressive" instead of progressive music. I messed up a lot of them but you fixed them. Thank you! Justabaldguy 22:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Happy New Year[edit]

Thanks for your support and your diligent copy editing. Har Roozetan Norouz, Norouzetan Pirooz هر روزتا ن نوروز , نوروزتان پيروز ! Amir85 13:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject Newsletter, Issue I[edit]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter
Issue I - March 2006
Project news
From the Coordinators

Welcome to the inaugural issue of the Military history WikiProject's newsletter! We hope that this new format will help members—especially those who may be unable to keep up with some of the rapid developments that tend to occur—find new groups and programs within the project that they may wish to participate in.

Please consider this inital issue to be a prototype; as always, any comments and suggestions are quite welcome, and will help us improve the newsletter in the coming months.

Kirill Lokshin, Lead Coordinator

Current proposals

delivered by Loopy e 05:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Battle of Lechaeum[edit]

Hi. I was slightly confused. You have a scholarly source but you also have the ancient text of Xenophon which is likely to be biased. The article doesn't differentiate what is known truth and what is historical narrative not up to modern scholarly standards. Is there a way to do that? gren グレン 21:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you for telling me. I really don't know anything aobut this... but I saw then name and began to question. So, I trust it's right... but... one thing is... would it be a good idea to cite that modern scholar XXX agrees with his account? Or, mix the tellings... just so that people like me with only a vague perception about this don't immediately call it into question. Thanks for the answer and I'll look at the Corinthian War article. gren グレン 21:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the same article... shame about the vases; I guess it's the fact they are 3D not 2D so there is some extra skill in photographing them! Gren's comment above makes sense actually, it would be nice if there was a better distinction made between "what sources say" and "what is actually believed to have happened" - I take it there was no archaeological evidence about the battle? (Perhaps that should be mentioned in passing too...) TheGrappler 14:29, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ketuanan Melayu[edit]

Thanks so much for copyediting it. It's great to see that someone other than me has finally made several revisions in a row in the article history. :p A little note, though: in Malaysia, UMNO is always referred to as UMNO, not the UMNO. In rare cases where its full name is used, it is called the United Malays National Organisation. Confusing, I know, but that's how it's referred to, so I think that's what we should call it. Johnleemk | Talk 08:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Lechaeum[edit]

I made a map to illustrate it, and I also included a location map to show where in Greece Corinth is. I think these will be of help to people who aren't so hot on their Greek - and ancient Greek - geography! You might want to check that I have my locations and captions all correct but I think I've done a pretty good job on them. TheGrappler 18:50, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, I've redone it - you might want to check the captions again, though, in case I've introduced a second mistake! TheGrappler 00:53, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how I got credit for this article achieving GA status (all I did was a few copy edits & nominate it), so I thought I should pass some congratulations on to you. Another Classics nerd, llywrch 01:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I hope you don't mind me reporting Image:Vase hoplite battle.jpg as a copyvio? You must have uploaded it before you realised that photographs of vases are not automatically PD. TheGrappler 01:48, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I suspect some of the US military images are actually copyrighted. If they are originally sourced from West Point history section, then their website apparently incorporated images which were drawn on the borders of commercial atlases from the 1980s, under licence, and therefore are only licensed for use on Dept of Defense websites. :-/ TheGrappler 05:29, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point - I believe the only pics the Air War College says have a dodgy status are the ones they sourced from West Point, not the other way round. Still, worth being careful - minefield this PD thing, isn't it? It's a shame that US govt sites aren't as clear about copyright as they could be. What do you think of the new-look map at Battle of Lechaeum? I think it looks a bit better but was I correct in the way I labelled Acrocorinth and the Peloponnese - do they have a particular Classical spelling too? TheGrappler 14:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Right, I think I follow you now! This link gives the copyright details, this link makes distinctions between images and maps added by AWC (those not added by AWC seem to be filched from West Point) and finally this link gives a list of AWC images, including some of those you've added. I'd recommend putting the first and third links onto all of the images you've uploaded from that list; along with the individual source URL for the image. That way, you've given the URL where the image can be found, the source (AWC), the copyright statement (which contains the proviso that West Point images may not be freely licensed) and a list stating that the particular images came from AWC not West Point. Nobody should quibble with that! Also, I guess you ought to put up for speedy (self-nominated) deletion Image:GuerreHoplites.jpg, unless you took that picture yourself (in which case you need to say so on the image file). I guess you missed that one when you went through your vase uploads. I also have the feeling Image:Greecemap.gif is a West Point image, possibly from a commercial atlas? Anyway, the FAC seems to be going well on Corinthian War. If you have any map requests, please ask - map-making is considerably less stressful than editing sometimes! TheGrappler 17:42, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations[edit]

Corinthian War now comes complete with a little star :) TheGrappler 18:26, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue II[edit]

The April 2006 issue of the project newsletter is now out. You may read this issue or change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you by following the link. Thanks. Kirill Lokshin 18:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Romansfacingphalanx.JPG[edit]

No, there is no problem. I just forgot to tagg that one. You see I uploaded a lot of screenshots for this article: Roman military tactics. And I thought the license was okay, but someone pointed out it wasn't so I contacted the games publisher, Creative assembly/SEGA and I asked if I could use them.They said thet'd allow it was long as a disclaimer was added.

The Email exchange can be seen on this userpage:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Feydey#The_licence_Rome_Total_war Rex Germanus Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona 08:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Robth/Archive_1&oldid=1145369778"