User talk:Deacon of Pndapetzim

User talk:Deacon of Pndapetzim/Archive 2

DYK for Wantage Code

On 15 November 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wantage Code, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Wantage Code, a record of laws promulgated by the English king Æthelred the Unready and his councillors around 997, may provide the earliest description of a jury of presentment? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wantage Code. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Wantage Code), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:02, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Malcolm II of Scotland

Malcolm II of Scotland has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 02:58, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

		Happy New Year!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:28, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year to yourself, hope all is well! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:13, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Evanton

Evanton has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 03:44, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Scone, Scotlan" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Scone, Scotlan has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 2 § Scone, Scotlan until a consensus is reached. Crouch, Swale (talk) 00:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Evan Fraser of Balconie for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Evan Fraser of Balconie 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/Evan Fraser of Balconie until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

—Kaliforniyka^Hi! 04:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject

Hi, I see you're a member of WP:Mythology, would you be interested in a sub project on WP:Anthropology on oral tradition? Kowal2701 (talk) 14:11, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Eadwulfs

Looking at Eadwulf, Eadwulf of Bamburgh and Eadwulf, Earl of Bernicia, we have a lot of confusion of numerals:

Eadwulf of Northumbria redirects to Eadwulf I of Northumbria, but

Eadwulf II of Northumbria redirects to Eadwulf I of Bamburgh, but

Eadwulf II of Bamburgh is red, but

Eadwulf Cudel calls him "Eadwulf III of Bamburgh", yet

Eadwulf III of Bamburgh redirects to Eadwulf IV of Bamburgh, and

Eadwulf Evil-child also ruled Bamburgh and has no number.

From what I can tell, our Eadwulfs I and IV of Bamburgh are correct, but Evil-child should be the missing Eadwulf II and Cudel is the real Eadwulf III. Numbering Eadwulf I of Northumbria is a little confusing, given that no other Eadwulf who unambiguously ruled all Northumbria is presented. Srnec (talk) 00:21, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted. I think this is to do with confusion and mixed intentions about classifying Eadwulf died 913 as I of Bamburgh or II of Northumbria. Makes most sense to given them nicknames when possible, but start Bamburgh rather than Northumbria from after Aella's death; and number afresh rather than numbering as if they were still Northumbria, is that how you see it? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:42, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think so. I agree that the main issue of confusion is the Eadwulf who died in 913 and how he should be seen in relation to those that come before and after. If we leave him as is, then the numbering is correct and we just need to fix up the redirects. This is the scheme used here. There are no nicknames for Eadwulfs I and IV that I can see. Srnec (talk) 02:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to clean it up and fix links. I left Eadwulf I of Northumbria as is and created a Eadwulf of Northumbria dab page, but we could easily move the first to the base name and use hatnotes. Srnec (talk) 03:01, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, looks good. I do wonder about the Eadwulf I page but I guess it's probably OK where it is. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Proposed deletion of Dachuna

The article Dachuna has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern... sawyer * he/they * talk 15:35, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any valid reason for deletion, when did limited historical sources mean limited notability? We basically have only one source for Beowulf, doesn't mean the topic isn't notable. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 16:59, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Laws of London

On 18 November 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Laws of London, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to the Laws of London, merchants from lands ruled by the German emperor enjoyed special trading privileges in 11th-century London? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Laws of London. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Laws of London), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

1=Laun chba ller 00:02, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

very interesting article, Deacon of Pndapetzim. I enjoyed reading it. Thanks for putting it together. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:37, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mr Serjeant! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:38, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dachuna for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dachuna 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/Dachuna until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

... sawyer * he/they * talk 15:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand where you get the motivation to put all that effort trying to get useful articles deleted. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This type of canvassing is highly inappropriate behavior. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, since I have Deacon's talk page watchlisted, I was already aware of the AfD (I saw it in my morning reading of my watchlist over breakfast before Deacon posted on my talk page). I had planned to weigh in, but I had to feed farm animals and batten down the hatches this morning in front of a large storm headed my way. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pbritti, please don't come to my talk page posting nonsense again. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

this selective attempt to impose deletionist maximalism

i am already very tired of arguing about this but i am not a "deletionist" and i have no interest in anything other than improving the project and coverage of topics i'm interested in. in fact, i have written/rewritten multiple articles about medieval Insular saints' cults: Melangell, St Melangell's Church, Historia Divae Monacellae, and just yesterday i rewrote & expanded Saint Lide. i just do not think Dachuna is notable.
i may not be a historian, but that does not even slightly matter - i am able to read and analyze academic sources, and more importantly, ... sawyer * he/they * talk 18:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll politely remind you Sawyer that you are the one that raised this issue, which has consumed some of my time, indeed I'd intended to write an article today but had to spend time instead commenting on this. So with all due respect you don't get to complain about being 'tired of arguing about this'. Regarding being a historian, I don't care if you're not a historian, I'm not a physicist or evolutionary biologist or Sinologist, I made the comment because you were saying nonsense things about something that is much more complex than you seemed to understand. Personally I think if one is editing articles on a project like this one should be conscientious and relaxed but also honest about where and how one can contribute competently. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:23, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]