User talk:Shandris

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

Hi, I have posted my reply in ref to the comment u made regd WMP 11. Please check it out. You may reply there or on my talk page. Cya l8r. --soUmyaSch 14:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


Hello, Shandris, 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:Questions, 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!  u p p l a n d 05:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Cucuteni-Trypillian map[edit]

Thanks so much for doing that new map, Shandris. I actually did notice it before I went to bed last night, and was going to thank you for doing it. I am still trying to figure out how to do things on Wikipedia, and one of the things I'd love to be able to do is to created SVG images. What software did you use to make that? I would love to be able to create maps in SVG...

Anyway, there were a couple of things I would like to comment on about the map. The first is that I'm not very confident about the accuracy of it. I see that you probably based it on the map I'd made about a month ago, which I did in a rush. I was about to sub-divide the enormous Cucuteni-Trypillian culture article into a dozen sub-articles, and we didn't have a good map, which I felt was mandatory, especially since one of the articles (about the economy) was being nominated to be featured as a "DYK" on the main page - so I rushed through a "quick-and-dirty" map, based on very rough data that I was getting from a few sources. However, this data was not very accurate as far as the map goes, it was just "good enough" for a temporary fix. Afterwards, I have kept putting off redoing it, since there were other pressing issues that needed to be taken care of. But it has been on my "to-do" list - to make a new map that was absolutely accurate.

The reason the map is not completely accurate is due to a couple of reasons: 1) I could not find a map that shows the geographical territorial region of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture that is accurate. There are a couple of maps out there that have the territory indicated (a German one was being used that comes to mind), but it is innaccurate. 2) The map I made was based on where Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements are located, which means that instead of it being a shaded territory, it should actually show little dots where these settlements are. There's actually some indication that there were other groups living cheek-to-cheek with the Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements, specifically the Indo-European Yamna culture. However, I wanted to have a shaded region as a reference for people to quickly get an idea in their minds where the general region was for this culture's settlements. However, this is not very solid. 3) I didn't really have time to look at all of the Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements, and so the boundaries on that map are just very rough estimates based on the several dozen settlements I did look at (keep in mind there are over 1000 settlements), plus the knowledge I have of the region they occupied, but I would like to improve this.

So what I'd like to do to improve the map in this regard would be that I'd like to painstakenly go through all of the Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements, mark where they are on a map, and then use that data to create an accurate map based on verifiable data. I've played around in my mind with the idea of not having a map that has a shaded "territory" indicated, but instead just shows the dots where the settlements were located. I actually think this would be more realistic. The reason for that is because the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture was not in any conceivable way a "state" or "nation" - they had settlements that were completely independent from each other, and almost completely self-sufficient. Moreover, these settlements were scattered across vast areas in some cases - with lots and lots of land in between that was basically just wilderness. As I mentioned above, there also were nomadic or semi-nomadic groups of Indo-European pastoralists wandering through this area, leaving behind temporary camps or settlements that were only occupied part-time throughout the year as they would move from one grazing area to the next with their herds of cattle and horses. The large Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements were occupied by permanent residents who were farmers primarily, so we have these permanent large settlements of farmers with nomadic cattle herders roaming around amongst them, settling down temporarily either nearby or away from the permanent settlements. We know these two cultures interacted with each other, because they have found artifacts from each culture mixed with their respective archaeological sites. And they lived like this for almost two thousand years - hardly a brief encounter.

So what I'm trying to get at here is that I have problems with showing a shaded territory for the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture - which is probably why it has been impossible to find a map that has that shows this. Instead, I think it would be good to have a map that has the settlements marked out as dots. But that's going to take some time to create... :)

Okay, the other thing I'd like a map to do would be to indicate how the settlements were built over time. The Cucuteni-Trypillian culture started out in a relatively small region (northwestern Moldova), and expanded dramatically to cover a very large area before their culture ended. This took place over about 2700 years - so if you think about it, that would be like a culture that would have existed going back from our present time clear to the time of Homer. So to show this as one single area is a little misleading. There are very easy methods to use to show this - I was thinking of using a color code to indicate rough time periods. So, for instance, if we used settlement dots instead of a shaded region, we could make the dots different colors that would correspond to the time periods for when they began. I am thinking that the best way to do this would be to use the general time periods indicated in the main article (under the section called "Periodization"), and then try to come up with data that would show when the different settlements were started. This is, as you can imagine, going to be a BEAR of a job, especially since we're looking at over 1000 settlements! Oy. My brain already hurts just thinking about this. But to do otherwise would be to do this map a dis-service, since I believe its accuracy will be in question. Such is the demands of honest academic research...

Now, it may be that the best solution would be to have two maps - one that would be the basic reference map similar to the one you just made, and another more involved map that could be included where the actual specific settlements or geographical limits were being discussed in detail. However, even with that scenario, I'd still like to improve the general reference map, since the boundaries were roughly drawn originally, and not entirely accurate...

I very much like the clean look of the map you made, and I also like the way you placed the label for Moldova inside the country, instead of in the middle of the Black Sea, like I'd done. I like how you used different font for the name of the culture, too. Other than redrawing the boundaries to be more accurate (which I will work on producing), I think that what I'd like to suggest would be that I'd personally like to see a little more color in the map, but that's a personal preference on my part, and don't take it as a criticism, please. Your map is definitely an improvement over what I'd made, so thanks.

So, if you are interested in helping to make any of these future maps, just let me know. As I said earlier, I don't have the software available right now to create SVG files, but I wish I did. If I can't get this, then maybe I could create something on another format, and send it to you so you could make it into an SVG file. Does that sound okay? At any rate, thanks for the help, and congratulations on the nice-looking map! Let's stay in touch. --Saukkomies talk 15:03, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Wow what a long reply! It's almost like a whole chapter of a book :) Anyway, I totally agree with you; the map should have dots instead of shading, I just didn't have anything to go after. But if you give a rough sketch with all the dots (even if it's of very low quality, done in Paint), I can make a beautiful, high-quality map out of it. I produced it in Illustrator CS4. I think Inkscape is very unintuitive and difficult to use. Maybe I can learn you lol ;) I'm from Sweden by the way.
Thanks for all the compliments about my work; this is what makes it worth spending many hours on a map I have no relation to whatsoever ;) Concerning the basic (infobox), shaded map, we could make a map showing where the culture has existed during its WHOLE period, not separating it in any color spectrums, but make a time-based map to put into the correct article with both dots and a shaded one to show the expansion of the culture. It's very important that you give me a base to work with, regardless of quality, as it is very hard for me to improvise and make up details myself.
Yes I tried to pick some appropriate fonts and finally found them in my pretty big list of fonts. Concerning the color - I used a grey-white locator map used in thousands of articles on Wikipedia. The point of it is not to be colorful but to quickly show the area of interest. So let the dots and shading be colorful, not the background?--Shandristhe azylean 23:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Hail and well met, my new-found friend! I hope we can establish a potential working relationship for the development of "All Things Map" in the future! LOL!
It may interest you to know that I too have absolutely nothing directly connecting me to the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture, other than a general sense of wonderment and fascination. Moreover, I too am at least partially of Swedish descent (some of my ancestors hail from the region of Scania) and emmigrated from Sverige about 130 years ago... At any rate, yeah, the creation of maps is a tricky business. Errors introduced into maps tend to propogate, and this is the danger. And so it is with welcome regard that I am delighted to find someone who is willing to help with the creation of historical maps that are accurate and based on solid internationally-recognized scholarship.
So, I will be working on creating a map that indicates the settlements as a series of dots, rather than a shaded region, which is not entirely accurate. In order to understand this sort of map, one must surrender the concept of "nations" that encompass a geographical region of interlocking settlements. The Cucuteni-Trypillian culture had self-sustaining households that were grouped together in congregated settlements. Each house could have been extricated from its particular settlement and relocated in the middle of a wilderness, and it would have presented a minimal transition for its inhabitants, due to the fact that each household contained within itself the entire collection of technological applications that were necessary to create the way-of-life for the members of that culture. In other words, each house had the wherewithall to sustain itself independently from any other household in the community. Each house had within its enclosure the capacity to create all of the necessary elements that were required to sustain the Neolithic level of development that the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture realized.
So, because of this complete autonomy, each household in every settlement was in itself its own "Nation".
In order to illustrate this fact graphically on a map, it is imperative that the representation does not imply that the culture had "ownership" of the territory that lay between the various settlements. Each settlement had it own farms and traditional hunting areas that lay near to the actual settled area. However, at this time in history, Southeastern Europe was largely a wilderness, and there were vast regions of unsettled and unexploited lands that lay between each settlement. No member of the Cucuteni-Trypillian society would have tried to have lay claim to lands that they could not control or exploit - since they would have had plenty of work at hand to have exploited the land they had close to their settlements. Because of this, the lands between the settlements were largely unexploited, and unclaimed.
This is an alien concept for modern people, I realize. But it is how things were back then. The fact is that there was more land that was unused and unclaimed than there was land that was being utilized by humans. There were vast stretches of land that nobody used. Wow. And so to represent in a map that these areas "belonged" to the culture in question would be a fallacy. They didn't belong to anyone. And that, in itself, speaks volumes about the reality of the Neolithic world in southeastern Europe, I believe.
At any rate, I'll endeavor to create a map representing the multitude of Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements, and then I'll pass it on to you for imporovement. I hope that that is agreeable (as it appears to be). Thanks again for your efforts in this regard. --Saukkomies talk 01:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Awaiting your map. Fun co-operating with you, Sauk!--Shandristhe azylean 01:40, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Well, thanks for taking my request. Hopefully we could get a good map like that which Sauk mentioned set up. Again, thanks a lot. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 03:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Layout of Mughal Gardens at Taj Mahal[edit]

Hi Shandris! It has been quite a while since you took up the Taj Mahal site layout at WP:GL/I. I was wondering if you are still working on the file. If you are not willing to proceed with the file then please leave a note at WP:GL/I. Thanks! --JovianEye (talk) 14:03, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


I responded at my Commons talk page. Quibik (talk) 13:27, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

What am I talking about?[edit]

Didn't want to continue off topic discussion, but also wanted to show that I wasn't making stuff up ;) See here. -Andrew c [talk] 22:39, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Signpost/Newsroom/WikiProject desk/Interviews[edit]

Wikigraphists are encouraged to participate in the interview for the upcoming report on the project in The Signpost.

Orphaned non-free image File:Grooveicon.png[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Grooveicon.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).


  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:42, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Unter Null for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Unter Null is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unter Null until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Jay Σεβαστόςdiscuss 22:34, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BitTorrentIcon.png[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:BitTorrentIcon.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:23, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:JCB Cards logo.png[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:JCB Cards logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:15, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Swedish from Old Norse[edit]

Hello. Your Old Norse additions belong in the Relationship to Modern Scandinavian Languages table. ᛭ LokiClock (talk) 21:03, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

File:DecayChain Ununseptium.svg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DecayChain Ununseptium.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:54, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Bowness-on Windermere etymology section reverts[edit]

Hi, Shandris, Thanks for your attempts to make this section clearer. My using the Diana Whaley direct quotes does make it sound a bit academic and bald. My reverts are based on the following considerations: 1) If using direct quotes, as I was, it is not good practice to alter the text inside them in any way (except by adding square brackets to clarify explanatory additions - eg: 'O[ld] E[english]' instead of 'OE'). This is as per the WP Style Manual. As you probably know, other stuff must not be inserted, nor taken out without elision marks being present. 2) If not using or you are removing direct quotations (stuff in double quotes), you should use your own words and not use the same words or sentence construction used by the person quoted (i.e.: use paraphrasing). eg: We could say something like: "Whaley suggests that the meaning of 'Bowness' is 'the headland where the bull grazes', consisting of the Old English words 'bula' 'bull', and 'næss' 'headland'. She also suggests that this may refer to the keeping of a parish bull. [2] (cf. naze)" (ie: making it clear that the Wiktionary reference is not to be found in Whaley's text). The single quotes around phrases like 'the headland...grazes' and around words such as 'bull' are deliberate, as these are indirect quotation marks used by Whaley herself and indicate usage by nominal third persons (ie: Old English speakers of the time). What do you think? Apologies for being so pedantic about this - I used to teach citing & referencing to students and old habits die hard, etc.! I'm sure that we can come up with something that satisfies us both. Yours, Laplacemat (talk) 17:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your elaborate answer. I like to simplify things and make text understandable and clear to the common reader. I didn't realize you ought to paraphrase quotes like that. I'll be content if we somehow could get rid of those simple quotes. I was taught referencing and citing in school until our brains exploded, trust me on that. PS. Are you a big fan of this Diana? (not that I know who she is) :) --Shandristhe azylean 21:29, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Norfolk flag[edit]

How is the Rhodesian flag not similar to the Norfolk flag? They are almost identical apart from the center symbol. It's more similar than the Nigerian flag, which doesn't have a center symbol. - Metalello talk 20:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)