User talk:Senra/Archive 8

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

Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9

Contents

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

Please comment on Talk:Hunnic Empire

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hunnic Empire. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

Please comment on Talk:University of Pristina/RfC: split proposal

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:University of Pristina/RfC: split proposal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Robert Moss (dean)

He's buried in Ely Cathedral, and I recall seeing the tomb which is quite prominent and mentioned in the article. Worth a photo next time you're in the cathedral: I think there isn't one on Commons. Charles Matthews (talk) 18:08, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 06:35, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

Dispute resolution survey

Peace dove.svg

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite


Hello Senra. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.


You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 02:25, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

Please comment on Talk:Radical Right

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Radical Right. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

Please comment on Talk:Three-dimensional chess

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Three-dimensional chess. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

Please comment on Template talk:Pashtuns

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Pashtuns. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

Talkback

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Senra. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request#Memristor_paper.
Message added 10:41, 19 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shrike (talk) 10:41, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

Please comment on Talk:Khosrow Sofla

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Khosrow Sofla. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

Please comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

Please comment on Talk:Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

The Signpost: 02 July 2012

Please comment on Talk:Mali

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mali. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 11:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2012

The Signpost: 16 July 2012

The Signpost: 23 July 2012

Please comment on Talk:2012 Pacific hurricane season

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2012 Pacific hurricane season. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 July 2012

The Signpost: 06 August 2012

Please comment on Talk:List of African-American firsts

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of African-American firsts. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello again!

Two years back, when you and I were newbies, you were kind enough to comment on the Christchurch article, which after taking on board your comments and the comments of others, I managed to get to Good article status. You pushed on with your Little Thetford article of course, reaching the dizzy heights of a Featured article. I now have a Featured article candidate and hoped you would be interested enough to join the conversation at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dorset/archive1 and give us the benefit of your opinion. Best regards--Ykraps (talk) 06:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 August 2012

The Signpost: 20 August 2012

Please comment on Talk:List of fixed crossings of the Hudson River

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of fixed crossings of the Hudson River. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 August 2012

The Signpost: 03 September 2012

Please comment on Talk:Elizabeth Cotton, Lady Hope

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Elizabeth Cotton, Lady Hope. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Information

I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My76Strat (talk) 08:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Churches in Bedfordshire

This came up on the administrators' noticeboard because of a huge edit war. I decided to have a go at it. But I've only done one of the apparently two churches by that name. The article could stand to have more on the second church, I think. So (after consulting my talk page archives to remind me who that person interested in U.K. churches was) here I am. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 08:07, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for the heads-up but I need a little more context here. Where within the Admin' noticeboard is this 'huge edit war'? I can see in the history a reversion battle occurring between Logistics Speaker (talk · contribs) and Gwenlen (talk · contribs); one trying to promote a feature film and the other trying to prevent said promotion. To be honest though, I reduced my Wikipedia input due to similar huge battles in the past so I'm not really wanting to get into that stuff again.
Do these references help at all?
For the record, I am not that interested in 'UK churches'. I am more interested in local history; specifically East Cambridgeshire. However, I have created detailed articles on two local churches viz St James' Church, Stretham and St George's Church, Little Thetford plus I have had considerable input into other churches. The reference and bibliography sections of those two articles might give you some hints on where to find more information. Consider, for example, Crockford's clerical directory (access is usually free via a UK library card), Clergy of the Church of England or the Felstead (Bells) database
--Senra (talk) 09:40, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
It's Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#St Marys Church, Clophill, and you need not worry about the edit warriors. They've all had their account editing privileges revoked, and the edit war was over what is really, once one considers what an encyclopaedia article should be telling readers, only a very minor thing. Architecture, history, and geography are far more important to this article than whether someone on the WWW has just made a spooky movie. Wikipedia is supposed, after all, to be a proper encyclopaedia. Which is, of course, why I'd like to obtain and write more about the replacement church in the village centre, and probably work in things about the rectors if that turns out to be appropriate.

I'll have a look at what you cite, as much as is accessible to me; although if that 1908 one is by William Henry Page it's already used in the article. That's good stuff, though. I will, despite your protestations, continue to remember you as someone to consult about churches and villages in the U.K.. Locality, by the way, is relative. From some perspectives, Cambridgeshire and Bedfordshire are right next to each other. ☺

Uncle G (talk) 10:35, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Ha ha. You could have thrown part of Queen Gertrude's speech from Shakespeare's Hamlet, Act III scene II,230 back to me which is oft misquoted as "Methinks thou dost protest too much" and you would have been right! Point taken. Do let me know anything that is not accessible to you. I am always willing to help. For example, I'm pottering off to the local library this afternoon and I will see what Pevsner has to say about St Marys Church, Clophill as I know that Pevsner is not available on-line. Also, that 1908 link was indeed written by W H Page --Senra (talk) 11:45, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Consider also ...
--Senra (talk) 12:12, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
I've just taken your {{WPB}} from Talk:St James' Church, Stretham. I leave the ratings up to the wiki-project members. As you may notice, I found out about the EH funding from an on-line newspaper, and I have the listing as well. I also found a contemporary journal by a William Laxton that I'll have to check is William Laxton, that provided stuff on the new church. What I'd really like, but I doubt you can provide, are the architectural plan and illustration that are on the immediately preceding page, Laxton 1850, p. 6, which would make a very informative addition for the reader. I'd have to check their copyright status (1850 is probably out of U.K. copyright for architectural drawings) though. Uncle G (talk) 12:28, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Plans of both churches may be available at Lambeth Palace Archives. I will have a look when I get home. In the meantime Pevsner has a quarter page on the old and new churches at Clophill. I will drop you a link to an image of the relevant page via your Wikipedia email when I get home --82.103.128.45 (talk) 13:10, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Erm the above was me --Senra (talk) 13:14, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Not Lambeth Palace Archives but I found four entries for "Clophill" at Church Plans Online although each entry is accompanied by the statement "No plans exist in the archive". It is not clear to me whether any or all of these entries refer to the old or the new church. These entires might still be worthy of review as they declare work done when and by whom --Senra (talk) 14:39, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear Senra, you protested too little. I'm also adding you to one of my shitlists, as a Person of Knowledge. Thank you so much for your help--and allow me to reiterate that Uncle G has done an outstanding job in expanding the article, and that we don't need to fear those edit-warriors again. At most they can become a minor nuisance. Thank you again, Drmies (talk) 15:25, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Much appreciated, Drmies --Senra (talk) 20:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
More information ...?
--Senra (talk) 20:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

I have Earl de Grey already. It was in the 1850 source. I still need to sort out which Earl that is. The bells are new, as is the priory. Uncle G (talk) 11:29, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

  • There is no which as I believe patronage is "The right of presenting a member of the clergy to a particular ecclesiastical benefice or living" (OED n 1.) and the title "Earl de grey" is a hereditary peerage so is only held by one (in this case male) person until becoming extinct on the death of the last holder dying without issue. I therefore believe it correct, for example, to say "patron Earl de Grey" --Senra (talk) 12:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
    • There is in this case. The stone wasn't donated by a title. It was donated by a person. Uncle G (talk) 09:21, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
      • I altered the bit about "Portland style" to "Portland stone", since I couldn't find any references to the former, and (judging from a photo) the windows etc. appear to be made out of a light-coloured stone. If that's correct, did de Grey donate the Portland stone? Ning-ning (talk) 09:35, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
        • Laxton says sandstone. Uncle G (talk) 10:10, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Aha. We are talking at slight cross-purposes here. My comment beginning "There is no which ..." is in reference to my earlier comment beginning "In 1848 at least, patron of Cophill was Earl de Grey from Coate ..." (my later emphasis). The donation of a stone is a different matter entirely and indeed, in that case there is a which Earl de Grey --Senra (talk) 11:53, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
      • What a fascinating story. I'm intrigued by Lincoln Diocese's decision to build a new church, in what is a very small community (pop. 1,066 in 1848), based (in part, I assume) on the two documented enquiries in 1827 and 1839 (Church Plans On-line "Clophill"). I also note that, according to Church Plans On-line, the new church was built between 1848–50 under the Diocese of Ely and then approval was granted for renovation between 1961–62 under the Diocese of St Albans. Incidentally, the 1848–50 build cost of £2,300 equates to a present day (2010) value of £1,580,000 (Measuring worth: using average earnings). Truly fascinating --Senra (talk) 11:53, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
        • The £2,300 includes glazing, erecting the tower and nave, mortar, roofing (including purchase of lead), purchase, transport and cutting of Portland stone, purchase of pitch pine and oak, construction of flooring, ceiling, pews, pulpit and doors, moving bells and lych gate from the old church, drainage, landscaping of the churchyard, architect's fees and labour. Agricultural labourers in 1845 earned 2 shillings a week, so taking that as a base level, and assuming twenty unskilled labourers worked on the church for two years, the wage bill would have been £208. The price of lead in 1836 was £24 a ton and declining; estimating a weight of 30 tons, (Bere Regis church used 52 tons in 1628 for its roof) and a price of £18 gives a cost of £540. The figure of £2,300 seems a bit cheap. Ning-ning (talk) 14:15, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
        • You noticed the name of the 1958 chapel, then? There's probably a little more to say on the subject of the rebuild decision. There's certainly more to say on the rectors over the years, which anyone reading this is welcome to add. An article like this should be fascinating, I think. It's doing its job if a reader like you comes across it and sees more than "run-down ruin that was the subject of a fad in the 1960s and 1970s". Uncle G (talk) 14:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
          • Ning-ning: My goodness! Your attention to detail puts me to shame. Was that financial costs detail from "The Ecclesiastical gazette ..." (1850)? If so, are those Gazette's available on-line? I could use that kind of information in future --Senra (talk) 17:03, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
          • Uncle G: "... anyone reading this ..."—there's only you me and Ning-ning. Anyway, it's you who is making it fascinating. A superb article. I do feel that the decision to build the new church seems like a prime example of Victorian restoration gone mad and almost (but not of course by definition) a folly --Senra (talk) 17:03, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
            • Senra: no, sorry, I just entered a few search terms like "price of lead in 1850". All very approximate! I suppose the decision to build a new church could have been justified by its position on the flat next to the village, and not on a hill. Imagine walking up Old Church Path on a wet windy day in a crinoline, and sliding down afterwards. Ning-ning (talk) 19:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Oops

Sorry. Chienlit (talk) 00:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

No need. Really. [1] beats [2] fair and square my friend --Senra (talk) 01:16, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

RE: GA: Ely and Littleport riots

Hello, sorry for not replying sooner. I personally still think that this should qualify as a good article, but to tell you the truth it's been so long since I reviewed/wrote anything properly for Wikipedia, I suspect the standard of GA went up to an "almost a featured article" standard (I must have missed that memo), so I'm probably not the best person. I suppose what would be good is to see if the issues brought up in the original GA nomination can be fixed and then have another go at nominating it and see what another reviewer thinks, as I think the assessment was probably a little over expectant for a GA, at least at the time. Thanks Rob (talk) 23:17, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Cinematic television

I just wanted to say that your analysis and presented rationale on the AfD were very impressive. I wish we could all do that sort of thing in all deletion discussions, regardless of outcome. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 23:01, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

In general, I prefer to vote Keep in AfD's. In this case, I carried out some research, laid out the results and voted accordingly. It still hurts to see an article being deleted though --Senra (talk) 23:21, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK for William Jennens

Gatoclass 12:03, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Ferret legging/GA2#GA_Reassessment

Translation of response for those interested.

  • The nominator should stop denigrating the article and use common sense instead of talking nonsense. Perhaps [consider] WP:RX for The Times Wednesday, Dec 31, 1980; pg. 2; Issue 60814; col G or perhaps WP:RX for The Times, Thursday, Mar 31, 1983; pg. 12; Issue 61495; col A?

I.e. use the resource exchange to read some reliable sources

--Senra (talk) 01:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Centuries in Stretham

Hi Senra, I saw your reversion of my changes to Stretham. As you asked, I reviewed WP:CENTURY again, and I'm not clear on what you were intending. The changes I made seem to me to be appropriate. Help me understand. Same issue at Little Thetford. Thank you. SchreiberBike (talk) 05:25, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. In the featured article Little Thetford I was inconsistent in my use of hyphens between numeric centuries. For example in the lead of this version see 7th-century and 10th century. My understanding stems from the Little Thetford FAC and this discussion where Malleus explains: It's Xth-century when used as an adjective, such as Xth-century cottage, but Xth century otherwise. Malleus Fatuorum 13:44, 13 July 2010, Tuesday (2 years, 5 months, 18 days ago) (UTC+1). See also:
I guess I have always been confused with this rule. In this particular case, I reviewed your link WP:CENTURY before reverting you. I could not find evidence for your change at WP:CENTURY. However, on reviewing Malleus's 13 July 2010 statement and your changes in the light of WP:ORDINAL I now agree with you. I have reverted my revert.
--Senra (talk) 12:20, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick and clear response. My understanding is that the hyphen is used when the ordinal (20th) and "century" are used together as an adjective to describe the next word, whereas no hyphen is used when referring to the century as a noun. For example, you'd have a 15th-century house, but a house built in the 15th century. Have a happy new year. SchreiberBike (talk) 16:54, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Your sub-page

I have deleted User:Senra/Breast cancer awareness as you requested. That means that the reference to it at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks#Trial citation style conversion has become a "redlink", but that's not a problem. You could add a note there to explain what happened, but it's not necessary because anyone interested can click the redlink and see the deletion reason "U1: User request to delete page in own userspace" and ask you if they really want to know. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:49, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Much appreciated. Thank you --Senra (talk) 15:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Joseph Colt Bloodgood

Uncle G pointed me to the same drmies talk page entry, and I started the article because it seemed interesting. A lot more could be added. You are right to query use of Ancestry.com, although it seems plausible and its J.C. Bloodgood article cites other sources. His wife's name, charitable work and year of marriage are mentioned in Mansel, Sweetland & Hughes 2009, p. 17. I put in the ancestry.com details as a holding entry to remind me to track down a better source. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Great. Thank you. Happy new year (for whenever it arrives for you) --Senra (talk) 18:27, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Senra. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 08:37, 3 January 2013 (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.

Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 08:37, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I do not have access to that journal. My UK Library Card gives me access to everything from these Cambridgeshire County Council: Online Reference Databases including much of the Gale Journals Collection. I have checked there for your publication without success. I see you have raised your query at WP:RX. I am sorry I am unable to help further --Senra (talk) 09:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you anyhow.--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 09:52, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Page move request

During the peer review of Ely and Littleport riots 1816 a reviewer, Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs), suggests that the page-title should be changed. From his suggestions, I favour Ely and Littleport riots of 1816 with a redirect from the existing Ely and Littleport riots 1816. As I have not completed many page moves with redirects, could someone help me do this please?

Move Ely and Littleport riots 1816 to Ely and Littleport riots of 1816 leaving a redirect at Ely and Littleport riots 1816

--Senra (talk) 09:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done. As the target did not exist, you could have done this yourself: see WP:Moving a page for instructions, in case it comes up again. JohnCD (talk) 10:14, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your help. Yers I know I could have done it myself but I was worried about the implications to the reviews and the GAN. Once again, thank you --Senra (talk) 10:34, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

How to correctly replace a commons image

check-mark
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

From this page I raised a request to alter an image here which has now been done. I thus have two images, the original and the new one. What happens now? Do I download the new one and upload it as a new version over the original one? What is the correct procedure please --Senra (talk) 12:36, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


Or is it better just to replace the image directly in the article? --Senra (talk) 12:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd just replace the image directly unless there's a specific reason to get rid of the old file at the Commons. They seem to be sufficiently different that it's probably better not to overwrite the old one. Huon (talk) 17:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Much appreciated --Senra (talk) 18:35, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

You made your point

...at RFARB. Yes, Hex was partly baited. However, he's still responsible for his actions. He's also responsible for replying. We don't block for the low-level of baiting that occurred - admins are held to higher levels. Stop trying to insert a red-herring, and if you want to warn the other party for civility by baiting, feel free. However, I think they already are aware of such by now. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

It is not a red-herring to me otherwise I wouldn't be asking so strongly for clarification. However, thank you so much for taking the time to respond --Senra (talk) 17:36, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Senra. You have new messages at Dwaipayanc's talk page.
Message added 18:36, 6 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dwaipayan (talk) 18:36, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Of course you are welcome to review the article. Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian cities may give you some India-oriented perspectives, although that page is quite old and not updated. Kolkata is an Indian city article that is featured article.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
I just posted in the FAC page, and then saw your message. First and foremost, my sincere apologies for the ill-mannered response. Please pardon. Details in the FAC page. In a nutshell, I want you back, reviewing the article, please. Based on your recommendation, I was planning to change the structure of the article. Once again, I am sorry. Please resume. And I thought you found Torchiest's comment combative, so mentioned that in FAC. After reading your message to me, I understood you were referring to stfg. I can not comment on that. But sorry for the confusion.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:37, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
FAC page updated, please have a look. And once again I request you to come back reviewing, I am really ashamed of my behaviour.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:27, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Sources added in toponymy section for the view that Haider Mahal was the inspiration of the name. One additional view also added. Please see FAC.
Hyderabad was not a princely state when established in 1591. It became a Princely State during the British rule. This term is generally specific to nominally sovereign states in British India. Also, citing Everett-Hill alone may not be a good idea, as his book (2005 edition) was subject to some controversy, due to blatant error in the entry for Bangalore. I did not remove already-existing sources, since I did not add those, neither do I have access to those (the three Chicago University Press publications), although they are not books on origin of names.
Plus, I do not properly understand the use of diacritics. I have tried to incorporate those now. Please see if any further addition is needed. Do you think diacritics are needed for the name of the Caliph?--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Note that I have formally withdrawn from the FAC review. However, as stated, please do continue to ask my advice whilst you think I can help. It is great to learn that you are willing to critique sources such as Everett-Heath. My own point on Everett-Heath is that I trust his view on toponymy rather than the other sources that are/were in the article. In any case, yesterday I fired off an email to a UK toponymist for his view on the toponymy of Hyderabad. I mentioned Everett-Heath and asked if he knew of other reliable sources. I have not yet received a reply. If/when I do you will be the second to know (after me).
Diacritics. Please note that this is my own personal view (backed up by a UK toponymist friend of mine): in a toponymy section it is my view that diacritics are important to include if they are properly sourced because it helps other toponymists. Diacritics are beyond the general reader (such as I) and should thus (in my opinion) not be used throughout an article. I rarely create such diacritics myself. I digitally copy/paste them from sources.
--Senra (talk) 18:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

With regret

I'm sorry that my comments at the Hyderabad FAC offended you, Senra. There were reasons why I was very upset, and they are detailed elsewhere, but I have never wished to offend you. Regards, --Stfg (talk) 18:19, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I accepted your apology elsewhere. Please feel free to seek my advice (for what it's worth) as I have access to some sources you may not have. Good luck with the article --Senra (talk) 18:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, but it was Dwaipayan's apology there, and the sources would be for him or Omer123hussain. I am the copy editor who was involved. My expression of regret is the one above. --Stfg (talk) 18:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
In that case, sorry. I have emailed Dwaipayan a full explanation. I will send that same email to you, Stfg. Publicly, I will say that you have not directly offended me in any way. I of course read previous reviewers comments at FAC and in this particular issue I may have been unduly influenced by your (Stfg) comments elsewhere. If that is the case, I am sorry to both of you. I sincerely wish you both well and I know the article will pass through FAC at some point in the future --Senra (talk) 18:50, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Email received. Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 19:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Iris cat.jpg

With my thanks.

Drmies (talk) 14:56, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram opened

An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 26, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, (X! · talk)  · @813  ·  18:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

How I found the review

It is still listed from those pages: Special:WhatLinksHere/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Ely_and_Littleport_riots_of_1816/archive2. As for me, I came to it from Wikipedia:WikiProject Sociology/Article alerts. If there is a bug, i is probably part of the Wikipedia:Article alerts, process. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:58, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Image gallery

Hi Senra, thanks for your help. I didn't want to remove anything without first checking with editors who are very experienced on the topic, like you. I just wanted to make sure guidelines were being applied properly. Btw, I believe you linked to the wrong guideline on the article's talk page. You linked to Gallery pages, which failed consensus. I think you meant to link to WP:Galleries, right? That's what you said on the Help Desk ("Consider removing the Hiram College gallery per automated review, WP:NOT and WP:Galleries then placing the removed gallery on the talk-page.") Thanks, again. --76.189.106.37 (talk) 00:54, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Yups. Sorry. Now fixed to WP:Galleries and you are very welcome --Senra (talk) 01:02, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
No problem... just wanted to make sure. Btw, you fixed the link but the text still says "Gallery pages" instead of "Image galleries". :p Have a great evening. --76.189.106.37 (talk) 01:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

wiki editor medal

for your comment - many thanks for bothering to comment - regards - Youreallycan 01:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
For the record I have no idea of the backstory here. I am not in any way commenting on behaviour by non administrators. I am simply observing unsanctioned uncivil, arrogant and ingratiating behaviours by those privileged editors who are not earning the trust we gave them: Beeblebrox (talk · contribs), Maunus (talk · contribs) and Mathsci (talk · contribs). By not sanctioning such behaviour we are condoning it as a community and that is a very bad double-standard --Senra (talk) 11:36, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I find it ironic that you use personal attacks to complain about personal attacks. I find it equally odd that you can't bring such matters up at the appropriate noticeboard. The VP is not the place for it. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)