User talk:Ealdgyth/Archive 26
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Ealdgyth. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
William T. Anderson
Hi Ealdgyth, I know you're busy, but I thought I'd leave a note that William T. Anderson (which you peer reviewed a while back) is at FAC now, if you'd be interested in reviewing. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:30, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Project?
Got to wondering if I could ever get anything to a four award and realized that I DID in fact create Skowronek, Witez II and Henry Babson, all of which might be relatively non-controversial enough to run the gauntlet without giving me hives. Any interest in helping on getting any to GA status? Witez II would be the easiest for me because I have the most in-house materials on him, Skowronek probably next, also because so many sources, many of which I also have. Curious if (for four award purposes) I am able to claim "creator" for Russell and Sigurd Varian because there was some earlier material on them at Varian Associates that I incorporated into this article, which actually was created from two redirects. If I could, it's a rich vein and again, one where I don't have a lot of emotional attachment for the gauntlet. Thoughts? Montanabw(talk) 21:57, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
de Lacy and de Lacy GAs
I've reviewed both of these and placed them on hold for very minor fixes. Marvellous stuff, and I'm not sure how you do it all. Reading these made me wonder if we have anything here about the relations between the "aristocracy" and the Church from this time; it is quite an interesting subject as shown by Gilbert's unusual career choice. Regarding William, I have stepped back a little as you have had better eyes than mine on him and it looks very good, but I fully intend to chip in at FAC. Again, fantastic work. Sarastro1 (talk) 13:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
- Passed both, and placed them in the "Historical figures: other" section. Not sure whether they should have gone in an "de Lacy, Walter" or "Walter de Lacy" in terms of alphabetical order. Went for the latter, but please change it if that is not the best way to do it. Sarastro1 (talk) 13:16, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Re:Advice
I think we can trust your judgement in this regard; the article does seem to have a problem with primary sourcing, especially when you've pointed out that there are plenty of decent secondary sources out there. Ed agrees too, for what it's worth. J Milburn (talk) 09:37, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- You're right about the bot. I counted 108 interwikis, but I may have missed one. Either way, it's wrong. I'll let Jarry know, and mention it on the next newsletter. Naturally, a miscounted multiplier could change everything. I'll update the earlier round, as well. J Milburn (talk) 09:54, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
40em
Saw your note "40em is a better system as it adjusts for wide monitors". Not sure what 40em is supposed to do, but I have a wide Apple monitor running Firefox and the cites are showing in a single long column, not multiple columns, with lots of dead white space to the right of the column. Is that how it displays on your screen? Green Cardamom (talk) 19:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- NOpe, three columns on my Apple 30" display in Safari. Probably a Firefox issue? Template:Reflist suggests to use the "em" option rather than forcing a specific number of columns. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:00, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- It seems to be the 40, I previewed on 10,20,30 and they all worked to create multi-columns but 40 didn't. If you don't mind I set it to 30, that's the example number in template:reflist -- Green Cardamom (talk) 03:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 
to High 
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:43, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
QH & Morgans
Hey, long time no chat. Need your brain: Dana and I are working on Morgan horse. The article contains a claim sourced to the Okie state site that Morgan mares shipped to Texas, lost in the sands of time, influenced the American Quarter Horse. However, the AQHA site says zip about it, this book says they shipped some to the King Ranch. Can you help us either confirm or debunk the influence of the Morgan on the Quarter Horse? (I honestly don't care which way it goes, just want to bust breed myths if needed. So far the Morgan seems to have claims nearly as exaggerated as Arabians for influencing everything right and good in America!) Montanabw(talk) 20:39, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- Short answer - yes, indeed there are Morgan bloodlines in the QH. Not a huge amount, but there are. One guy's name was Andrew Sellman, and he had a bunch of mares that influenced a number of the Texas breeders. Let me dig for a few articles... I have them in the files somewhere.. There is also one documented Shetland cross into the QH, along with a number of Arabians. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:57, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for anything you can do! Just throw it all into the Morgan article or on the talk page there, whatever works. (SHETLAND PONY! ROFL!) Montanabw(talk) 21:08, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- Fuller answer - You want these articles: Frank King "The Quarter and Morgan Horses" Western Livestock Journal October 15, 1941 pp. 37-38; Duval Williams "Morgan Blood in Our Western Cow-horse" Cattleman September 1939 pp. 25-26; Jeanne Thomas "Morgan Bloodlines in Texas Quarter Horses" International Horse's Mouth (do not have date or pages on this); Mrs. S. W. Worthington "Was Steelduts a Morgan?" Western Horseman May-June 1939 pp. 10-11; LaVonne Houlton "Richard Sellman's Morgans Part 1" Western Horseman March 1967 pp. 12; 101-103; Houlton "Richard Sellman's Morgans Part II" Western Horseman April 1967 pp. 68, 102-106; Houlton "Richard Sellman's Morgans Part III" Western Horseman May 1967 pp. 80, 160-163. There are also Morgan bloodlines in the 6666 Ranch lines, in the Matador ranch lines, in the JA Ranch lines. The 4 6's used two Morgan stallions - Jubilee King and Redolent. Matador used Rondeau by Headlight Morgan and Pluto by Troubador of Willowmooor. The Triangle Ranch also had some Morgan bloodlines. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:17, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- It's also quite easy to troll through the first five AQHA stud books and see the various "mare by a Morgan stallion" or "part Morgan mare" as dam lines. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:18, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- What would be the best way, then, to state and cite something akin to "Morgan bloodlines had influence on the American Quarter Horse." We maybe could/should mention the stallions if they were quite significant? (See the talk page of the Morgan article) Montanabw(talk) 16:52, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- Ealdgyth, I don't have access to any of these sources. Do you have the time/interest to whip something up re: this topic, or could you e-mail me copies of whichever articles you think would be best for this topic? We don't need a huge exposition, but the fact that Morgans contributed to one of the most popular breeds in the world today is probably deserving of more than the sentence it's currently given in the article. Dana boomer (talk) 15:12, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- It depends on what you're looking for.... they contributed, but not nearly as much as the Thoroughbred or the Mustang would have. THe problem with the stuff from the Stud Books is that ... it's all OR. (I need to get that article done someday...). I'm like swamped in RL work ... and with William the Conqueror at FAC - my time is somewhat limited. It might be a week or so before I can really dig into this. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:19, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Hmm, maybe something along the lines of "Morgans played a part in the development of the Quarter Horse, although their contribution was much smaller than that of the Thoroughbred and Mustang. Some famous Quarter Horse lines that developed from Morgan stock were...." or something along those lines? Just a couple of sentences, a small paragraph at most, I'm thinking. No biggie on it taking a while - I still have some digging to do into a few other areas, so although I'd like to take the article to GA in the next few months, I'm not in any real hurry. July/August is extremely busy in RL for me, as well, so I'm not sure how I'll fare in the upcoming Cup round... :( Let me know if there's anything of yours that I can take a look at/help out on in return... Dana boomer (talk) 18:01, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Whatever you can do, as you can do it. Dana and I are noticing that the Morgan folks seem to have almost as many heroic myths about their breed as we saw with the Arabians and Andalusians, so as we slaughter sacred cows, we just want to have very good sources. We also have a good non-WPEQ helper on this one with Intothatdarkness. Montanabw(talk) 20:22, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Hmm, maybe something along the lines of "Morgans played a part in the development of the Quarter Horse, although their contribution was much smaller than that of the Thoroughbred and Mustang. Some famous Quarter Horse lines that developed from Morgan stock were...." or something along those lines? Just a couple of sentences, a small paragraph at most, I'm thinking. No biggie on it taking a while - I still have some digging to do into a few other areas, so although I'd like to take the article to GA in the next few months, I'm not in any real hurry. July/August is extremely busy in RL for me, as well, so I'm not sure how I'll fare in the upcoming Cup round... :( Let me know if there's anything of yours that I can take a look at/help out on in return... Dana boomer (talk) 18:01, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- It depends on what you're looking for.... they contributed, but not nearly as much as the Thoroughbred or the Mustang would have. THe problem with the stuff from the Stud Books is that ... it's all OR. (I need to get that article done someday...). I'm like swamped in RL work ... and with William the Conqueror at FAC - my time is somewhat limited. It might be a week or so before I can really dig into this. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:19, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Ealdgyth, I don't have access to any of these sources. Do you have the time/interest to whip something up re: this topic, or could you e-mail me copies of whichever articles you think would be best for this topic? We don't need a huge exposition, but the fact that Morgans contributed to one of the most popular breeds in the world today is probably deserving of more than the sentence it's currently given in the article. Dana boomer (talk) 15:12, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- What would be the best way, then, to state and cite something akin to "Morgan bloodlines had influence on the American Quarter Horse." We maybe could/should mention the stallions if they were quite significant? (See the talk page of the Morgan article) Montanabw(talk) 16:52, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- It's also quite easy to troll through the first five AQHA stud books and see the various "mare by a Morgan stallion" or "part Morgan mare" as dam lines. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:18, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Marengo pic?
What is your thinking on the IP who added the painting of Napoleon on Marango to the Arabian horse article? We DID need an image there since the Polish image was tossed from Commons (still want to find that painting and put it back, was mega-cool). My concern is how good the evidence is that Marengo was an Arabian, I've seen some stuff saying he's a partbred? What do you have on that?? Montanabw(talk) 17:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
If you "absolutely despise talkpage templates", don't spam them in other users' talk pages
Like you did in my talk page, groundlessly accusing me of "disruptive editing" and "vandaliz[ing] Wikipedia". --Niemti (talk) 16:13, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
And not even accusing, but stating it like if it was a fact. --Niemti (talk) 16:15, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
In other words, remove this stupid template. --Niemti (talk) 16:16, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Um.. I've never edited your talk page. Since I haven't, I couldn't have spammed a Template:Talkback on your page. Perhaps have you mistaken me for someone else? Ealdgyth - Talk 17:15, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- This guy is impersonating you. You can't blame Niemti for assuming that the message came from you given that it had your signature attached. 188.29.226.84 (talk) 23:38, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Note that it was autosigned by Sinebot with the IP address. Also, a quick glance at the editing history of the user talk page would show I've never edited it. Nor have I ever edited the supposed edit-warred page... a bit of due dilligence is probably in order before accusing someone of something like that... especially when the warning was put in by an IP address. As an aside, I've never edited as an IP - but whatever. It's pretty clear it's not me. I've got no interest in editing TV show articles ... Ealdgyth - Talk 23:57, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Probably worth reporting the IP for that crap, though. Niemti appears to be a new user and the diff looked kind of real for a few minutes before Sinebot got there. That said, Niemti, you DID jump the gun not to check this out. Montanabw(talk) 01:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
- Note that it was autosigned by Sinebot with the IP address. Also, a quick glance at the editing history of the user talk page would show I've never edited it. Nor have I ever edited the supposed edit-warred page... a bit of due dilligence is probably in order before accusing someone of something like that... especially when the warning was put in by an IP address. As an aside, I've never edited as an IP - but whatever. It's pretty clear it's not me. I've got no interest in editing TV show articles ... Ealdgyth - Talk 23:57, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
WikiCup 2012 June newsletter
Apologies for the lateness of this letter; our usual bot wasn't working. We are now entering round 4, our semi-finals, and have our final 16. A score of 243 was required to reach this round; significantly more than 2011's 76 points, and only a little behind 2010's 250 points. By comparison, last year, 150 points in round 4 secured a place in the final; in 2010, 430 were needed. Commiserations to Pool A's 
igordebraga (submissions), who scored 242 points, missing out on a place in the round by a whisker. However, congratulations to Pool B's 
Grapple X (submissions), whose television articles have brought him another round victory. Pool A's 
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came second overall, with an impressive list of biological did you knows, good articles and featured articles. Third overall was Pool D's 
Muboshgu (submissions), with a long list of contibutions, mostly relating to baseball. Of course, with the points resetting every round, the playing field has been levelled. The most successful Pool was Pool D, which saw seven into the final round. Pool B saw four, C saw three and Pool A saw only the two round leaders.
A quick note about other competitions taking place on Wikipedia which may be of interest. There are 13 days remaining in the June-July GAN backlog elimination drive, but it is not too late to take part. August will also see the return of The Core Contest- a one month long competition first run in 2007. While the WikiCup awards points for audited content on any subject, The Core Contest about is raw article improvement, focussing heavily on the most important articles on Wikipedia. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 10:52, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Catholic bishop
Hi Ealdgyth, long time no see. I'm in the middle of expanding an article on a Catholic bishop (draft here) but am worried that I'm not using some of the terms correctly. Could you help me, or point me at someone who has a pretty good understanding of the topic? Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:28, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- Heh. I'm much more familiar with usage for terms in the middle ages, not modern times. I would post over at the Christianity project for someone conversant with modern usage. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:24, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. Yeah, I'll drop by the Wikiproject as the draft approaches completion. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:11, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:56, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Main page appearance: Hygeberht
This is a note to let the main editors of Hygeberht know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on July 5, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 5, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Hygeberht was the Bishop of Lichfield from 779 and Archbishop of Lichfield after the elevation of Lichfield to an archdiocese some time after 787, during the reign of the powerful Mercian king Offa. Little is known of Hygeberht's background, although he was probably a native of Mercia. Offa succeeded in having Lichfield elevated to an archbishopric, but the rise in Lichfield's status was unpopular with Canterbury, the other southern English archbishopric. Offa was probably motivated by a desire to increase the status of his kingdom and to free his kingdom's ecclesiastical affairs from the control of another kingdom's archbishopric, and possibly the need to secure the coronation of Offa's successor, which the Archbishop of Canterbury had opposed. After Offa's death his distant relative Coenwulf became king, and petitioned the pope to have Lichfield returned to a simple bishopric. The pope agreed to do so in 803, by which time Hygeberht was no longer even considered a bishop: he is listed as an abbot at the council that oversaw the demotion of Lichfield in 803. The date of his death is unknown. (more...)
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
- Precious and enlightening again, the rather obscure circumstances of what you called "a very obscure little guy", thank you! Did you know that you were proclaimed an awesome Wikipedian three times, 12 November 2008, 10 March 2009 and 24 May 2012? (I fixed the respective user box.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:57, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Late TFA notifications
I wrote to Raul in April about receiving less than an hour's notice of a forthcoming TFA, and he replied: "It's not that the notifications are going out late. It's that for the last two or three weeks, I've been scheduling them close to the deadline. I'll make an effort to build up a larger queue today." I couldn't make much sense of that, but obviously the practice of last-minute notifications is continuing, and indeed seems to be institutionalised. I notice that TFAs have currently been allocated up to 8 July, but that none of the principal editors have yet been informed, not even tomorrow's. It seems that someone has decided to automate the process, and to hell with the consequences. Sometimes I despair of this place. Brianboulton (talk) 09:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- In all likelihood at least partly due to an increasingly low activity level. In the last several weeks almost all his edits are TFA related, often just before deadlines, and some TFA selections have been made by others. 10:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The Medieval Barnstar | |
| For Ealdgyth, the beste scribe that in her tyme is, or myghte be. INeverCry 00:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC) |
- Ooh pretty. - Dank (push to talk) 19:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
For you
|
The Content Review Medal of Merit | |
| By order of the Military History WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article Candidate reviews for the second quarter of 2012, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. - Dank (push to talk) 19:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC) |
Main page edit
Hi there, I come bearing an apology. I conducted this edit yesterday and it looked OK on my computers but obviously not on yours. I hate it when edits are conducted as a result of main page appearances, (I had a fair few on Dan Leno last month). As edits go, I thought this was a very minor but effective one. I'm sorry for any problems caused. -- CassiantoTalk 09:09, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- I suspect that there is a browser issue with some browsers not displaying the columns correctly. No biggie. I gotta say Hygeberht was one of the easiest main page appearances I've ever had... Ealdgyth - Talk 12:48, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- It looked great on Safari in three col's, oh well never mind. Yes it is a very interesting article. Congrat's! -- CassiantoTalk 16:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
England in the Middle Ages...
...is out of user-space at last. It could do with a look over by a suitably qualified medieval editor though...! :) Hope you're having a drier time of it than we are in the UK - ridiculously wet at the moment, with floods etc... :( Hchc2009 (talk) 18:11, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'd gladly take some rain, we're 11 inches behind for the year. I'll try to get to it later in the week - along with the lack of rain, we're having record heat - it's 105 °F (41 °C) here today with a heat index of 110 °F (43 °C). My horses are grumpy, I'm grumpy, and all I want to do is sit in the house near the AC. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:15, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- Typical - I'm sat looking at my grapevines which are showing precious little inclination to mature nicely, given the lack of sunshine. Have tried to explain to the kids that in the medieval period this would have meant famine ahead... Hchc2009 (talk) 18:22, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
William the Conqueror
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| For your fantastic work on William the Conqueror; you're really making a difference, here. That article will prove invaluable to many, many people. J Milburn (talk) 18:10, 8 July 2012 (UTC) |
Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)
Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:
- Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM
It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.
At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).
Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.
If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 17:15, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey, just thought I'd let you know that this is at GAC, in case you didn't know. Looks like a very impressive article at first glance. J Milburn (talk) 22:47, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
- Yep, I've been watching over it being rebuilt in the sandbox. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:06, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
ad. Hillary of Chichester
Hi, we (on pl.wiki) do a translation of that article. Thing is, there are some words, that are problematic. Could You please write me, what do you mean by: clerk, writing office, grant?. — User:Paelius 13:39, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- I've already communicated with someone from the polish wikipedia, explaining what clerk means. Personally, I'm not a big fan of the "translate without looking at sources" thing that happens on the non-English wikipedias. Ya'll should be doing your own research and writing your own articles, not just translating. If you don't understand the subject matter well enough to translate the more specialized terms, why should I be pestered? After all - this is specialized subject matter ... and there are subject matter dictionaries that exist to help folks figure out the meaning of the words. But... clerk in this meaning means both a person who acts as a secretary AND a member of the clergy. Writing office is ... an office that deals with writing - both documents and letters. I have no idea what context "grant" is used in. And quite frankly, none of these words SHOULD be problematic... they are the basic vocabulary of medievalists and if you cannot understand their meaning, you probably shouldn't be translating medieval articles. And if your understanding of English is only as good as what you wrote above, I'm a bit concerned with your ability to understand English well enough to translate into Polish. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:00, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- Ha! I was the one, that was against translation, but it seems, that I was to "little". Anyway, for me the best would be the latin names of both - clerk and writing office. Unfortunately, I am not able to find english-polish medieval vocabulary, 'cause it didn't exist. Thank You for Your answer. — User:Paelius 09:16, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- I've just assisted a Polish librarian to "repatriate" a small library of Polish books. I gather most of the books (novels and some factual books on Polish history) aren't easily available in Poland. The oldest books in the library were published in Jerusalem and Rome in 1944 and 1945 by Polish soldiers, and brought to Britain. Can't say I saw anything on English history there, and I suspect there's probably very little available in Poland; apparently a common view of England amongst the younger generation is that the houses are infested with ghosts- my friend's new lodger hears ghosts talking whilst he's doing his embroidery. Ning-ning (talk) 21:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
- Ha! I was the one, that was against translation, but it seems, that I was to "little". Anyway, for me the best would be the latin names of both - clerk and writing office. Unfortunately, I am not able to find english-polish medieval vocabulary, 'cause it didn't exist. Thank You for Your answer. — User:Paelius 09:16, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:43, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
WP Horse Racing in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Horse Racing for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 03:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Americus (horse)
Hey; finished the GAN review for this :). Looking forward to seeing it promoted! Ironholds (talk) 13:00, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Mirabeau GAN
I believe that I've responded to all of your comments at Talk:French battleship Mirabeau/GA1--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:45, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Magna Carta
I note Magna Carta in your to-do list; I'm half tempted to start work on that, y'know! It'd go with some of my other work. On an unrelated note; turns out there's not a single book on our Bill of Rights. Blech! Ironholds (talk) 19:17, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- The Core Contest IS coming up... Ealdgyth - Talk 20:59, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- ooh. Alright, this is looking tempting. Ironholds (talk) 19:55, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for improving the Gilbert de Lacy article
Hello. You recently undid some of my edits to Gilbert de Lacy. I started poking around for citations to what I thought had been credible additions, and found that you had been entirely in the right in deleting what you had. So thanks for helping things be a bit more rigorous than I would have left them. Your help is appreciated! Rinne na dTrosc (talk) 22:02, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Hubert Walter's tomb
Hi Ealdgyth, I was in Canterbury a few months ago and took a picture of Hubert Walter's tomb...it didn't turn out very well and I didn't get a chance to take a better one, but maybe it could still be useful for the article? Just thought I would let you know about it in any case. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:41, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I tried to get it when I was in Canterbury in 2010 - mine turned about just as well. Its in a really bad spot to take photographs - I think we're better off without bad pictures of the tomb, honestly. It might be different if there was an effigy, but there isn't... Ealdgyth - Talk 15:57, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
WikiCup 2012 July newsletter
We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees Cwmhiraeth (submissions) as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees Grapple X (submissions) in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees Muboshgu (submissions) in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's 
Ruby2010 (submissions) follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.
Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Vacation
I'll be on vacation from 1 August to 6 August - will have laptop but will not be available as much as usual. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:03, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Main page appearance: Gregorian mission
This is a note to let the main editors of Gregorian mission know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on August 10, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 10, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
The Gregorian mission was the missionary endeavour sent by Pope Gregory the Great to the Anglo-Saxons in 596 AD. Headed by Augustine of Canterbury, its goal was to convert the Anglo-Saxons to Christianity. Along with Irish and Frankish missionaries, they converted Britain and helped influence the Hiberno-Scottish missionaries on the Continent. In the late 6th century Pope Gregory sent a group of missionaries to Kent, to convert Æthelberht, King of Kent, whose wife, Bertha of Kent, was a Frankish princess and practising Christian. Augustine was the prior of Gregory's own monastery in Rome and Gregory prepared the way for the mission by soliciting aid from the Frankish rulers along Augustine's route. In 597 the forty missionaries arrived in Kent and were permitted by Æthelberht to preach freely in his capital of Canterbury. Soon the missionaries were able to write to Gregory telling him of their success and that conversions were taking place. A second group of monks and clergy was dispatched in 601 bearing books and other items for the new foundation. The exact date of Æthelberht's conversion is unknown but it occurred before 601. Before Æthelberht's death in 616 a number of other bishoprics had been established. Although the missionaries were unable to remain in all of the places they had evangelised, by the time the last of them died in 653, they had established Christianity in Kent and the surrounding countryside and contributed a Roman tradition to the practice of Christianity in Britain. (more...)
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
- I saw the conversation on my talk this morning, and glanced at it. The present state of affairs looks a bit awkward to me, but I hope you are not feeling negative about the incident. Wikipedia is shockingly indifferent to content contributors, but can't afford to lose people.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:50, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
William de Chesney (sheriff)
Hi Ealdgyth, I've left some comments on the GA review for William de Chesney (sheriff). I see you're keeping pretty busy, so take your time. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:26, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
- Alright, looks good, I've passed the article. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
ANI; quoted you
- "My preference would be no more of the articles I've done the major share of the work on on the main page ... but I know that's just the TFA talking. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)"
fyi, I quoted that at:
Br'er Rabbit (talk) 03:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Core articles contest
I thought you were very brave in picking up Bow and arrow, and it inspired me to have a go at information technology, but so far I've found it to be a very frustrating experience. I know pretty much exactly what I want to say, but having to continually find sources that confirm what I know to be true is rather ... well. So should I be driven by the sources or by what I know to be true? Any tips? Malleus Fatuorum 20:16, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- (butting in) I tend, on things I know fairly well, and especially big topics, to write what I know first, then go to sources, which of course often leads to extra or different stuff (even, ahem, corrections to what I wrote). I'm pretty sure Ealdgyth does it the other way round though. Johnbod (talk) 20:22, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, with this sort of topic, I kinda figure out an outline, and then just add in what I need from the sources...Ealdgyth - Talk 20:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- That's pretty much what I've been trying to do, but it's a painfully slow process. Anyway, good luck with yours. Malleus Fatuorum 20:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- Heh. I got a promotion at my consulting job so .. I'm swamped. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:54, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm going through a kind existentialist dilemma with this contest since Truthkeeper tried to withdraw her nomination of the Alps. Shouldn't we all be helping each other instead of competing against one another? Malleus Fatuorum 04:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
- (belatedly) folks are allowed to collaborate on this too. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:37, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Any coping strategies?
I'm finding it quite draining to have to fight on so many fronts simultaneously, to keep even a dreg of quality in articles. Today for instance there's been a lot of interest in the Moors murders because of a report that Brady has written a letter giving the location of the body one of his victims, and two RfCs on the information technology article that I foolishly entered in the Core Articles Contest. I really don't see how Wikipedia can survive in this way. Malleus Fatuorum 21:33, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- I keep thinking the logical way for this place to evolve is the more use of semiprotection on consolidated articles, the idea being we stabilise and consolidate relatively polished bits
ifwhen the reverting becomes too much of a drain. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:09, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- I have a vague memory of a study a few years ago reporting that software engineers were on average only really productive for the first four years of their careers. After that they got caught up in bug fixing, maintenance, debugging ... I don't even think it would be four years here, more like four minutes after you touch any high-profile article. Malleus Fatuorum 23:17, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- An internationally-known pianist once played a concert at Middlesbrough. The local paper, lacking a music correspondent, sent their sports editor instead. The concert promoters, fearing for their reputation, took the journalist aside, poured a few beers into him, and offered to write the review themselves. He agreed, so the review was written and given to him. Next day the glowing review appeared in the paper, with the journalist's addendum "He played with equal facility on the black keys as well as the white". Ning-ning (talk) 03:09, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- I really hope that's true. Malleus Fatuorum 22:37, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- I think all i do any more is revert vandals and try to fix disasters. New articles? Wha'? Montanabw(talk) 22:26, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- Blimey, Malleus, trouble really does follow you around. It's like a Johnny Cash song. information technology I mean. I suppose on IT topics we are full of people who are sure they know. I always recommend developing an interest in art history for those seeking WP's calmer waters. Plenty of rudimentary stubs on important topics & by & large nobody cares what you write but quite a few people read it. But it doesn't work for everyone. Johnbod (talk) 01:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
2nd Ranger Infantry Company (United States)
G'day, Ealdgyth, I'm not sure if you've seen my comment at Talk:2nd Ranger Infantry Company (United States)/GA1. If you get a chance, would you mind taking a look and letting me know what you think? Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- You're right, I had missed that - I've updated and passed the article... thanks for the heads up! Ealdgyth - Talk 15:56, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- No worries, thanks for your time and patience with that article. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:29, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
A horse of a different color
[1] Drmies (talk) 01:47, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 25
Hi. When you recently edited Bow and arrow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bodkin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Bishops' visit
Coming soon, the image looks more "contemporary" than last time, but could perhaps be cropped a bit, what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- A crop would be fine. What did I do wrong in a previous life to get so many TFAs recently??? Ealdgyth - Talk 19:32, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know, perhaps talk to the bishop ;) - there's Amazing Grace, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:36, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- I did two crops; a less-tight one's in the history if you prefer it. The source is low-res, so there's not much more to be gotten by fussing with it. I'd not be surprised if an image gnome does, though. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 21:44, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Having recently nominated an article at GAN I thought it only fair to do a few reviews, and yours was one of them. I've left a few comments at the review, which is now on hold. Malleus Fatuorum 19:07, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Recognising that you're snowed under with work, and hating to fail a good GAN, I did some work on the article this afternoon. Assuming I haven't cocked anything up I'm now happy to list this as a GA as soon as you've checked/corrected what I've done. Alternatively, if I've completely fucked it up, then I'm equally happy to wait until you've had time to address the issues yourself. Malleus Fatuorum
David FitzGerald
Yes, I moved the article. I gave it the proper spelling - FitzGerald - which is used by all the other articles for his brothers and sisters. It's highly unusual for any FitzFoo article to be spelled fitzFoo. Even Fitz-Foo is a more common variant. Sory for losing the history and for the upset that this seems to have caused you. I'm not an admin but will not object to a solution that restores the history while keeping the present name. But I don't know how to do that. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:18, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Perhaps, then, if you don't know how to do something (such as move a page) you might in the future, check the help or ask for advice? Actually, "fiztFoo" is also correct, but I don't object to the change of name - but it might have been nice if you'd at least asked on the talk page... or mentioned it here, so that I could have helped you move the article. I've left a note on an admin's talk page and hopefully someone will fix the problem. For future reference - the move tab at the top of the article page (up with the history and the talk tabs) is for moving articles around ... if you can't move it for whatever reason (usually a redirect in the way), that's a sign that you'll need adminish help in the process. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:24, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
New project- WR Brown
Working on WR Brown (finally) User:Montanabw/Sandbox 4. Dive in as you see fit, and welcome! Have GBE and Conn, plus the new article in MAH this month. Having some fun finding stuff on how he got his money in the first place. In fact, any help appreciated. Montanabw(talk) 03:20, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- and ping another new one: Part-Arabian. Long needed, I did it as an annotated list as it's too damn complicated otherwise, just cover the basics and send everyone to the particular breed page. Needs sourcing, but that will take some time, and may be able to be expanded; feel free to go wade around in there if you feel like it, particularly if you want to add some photos. Montanabw(talk) 05:14, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
One thing leads to another
While working on Malkin Tower the subject of halmote courts came up, which led me to the article on court baron and its merger dicussion and thus on to manorial courts. One merger and an expansion later, I'm wondering if this is a topic you have any expertise in, as manorial courts were apparently introduced by the Normans? (The article on villeins is even more dreadful.) Malleus Fatuorum 16:50, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
JoshTaylor1998wiki
At least he's read my talk page notes; he's started to use edit summaries, I think as a result of my comments, though it's not yet what I would call a collaborative approach. If he doesn't respond to the current attempts to engage him I think an RfC might be necessary. I might do the RfC on the Offa talk page and include references to the other relevant articles. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Photo question
Hey Ealdgyth, been working on William Robinson Brown (100th anniversary of Maynesboro being celebrated in his neck of the woods Sept 15). Would like to upload an image of *Abu Zeyd, but would prefer to do it on commons rather than fair use. However, none of my books verify that iconic photo of him that's all over was published prior to 1923, though I think it HAD to have been...as I think he died prior to 1923? It probably was published in Brown's annual catalogue or something public. Can you verify -- or not-- via any of the source materials you have? Muchas Gracias in advance! Montanabw(talk) 21:50, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
WikiCup 2012 August newsletter
The final is upon us! We are down to our final 8. A massive 573 was our lowest qualifying score; this is higher than the 150 points needed last year and the 430 needed in 2010. Even in 2009, when points were acquired for mainspace edit count in addition to audited content, 417 points secured a place. That leaves this year's WikiCup, by one measure at least, our most competitive ever. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:
Grapple X (submissions) once again finishes the round in first place, leading Pool B. Grapple X writes articles about television, and especially The X-Files and Millenium, with good articles making up the bulk of the score.
Miyagawa (submissions) led Pool A this round. Fourth-place finalist last year, Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, and has reached the final primarily off the back of his massive number of did you knows.
Ruby2010 (submissions) was second in Pool B. Ruby2010 writes primarily on television and film, and scores primarily from good articles.
Casliber (submissions) finished third in Pool B. Casliber is something of a WikiCup veteran, having finished sixth in 2011 and fourth in 2010. Casliber writes on the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. Over half of Casliber's points this round were bonus points from the high-importance articles he has worked on.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came second in Pool A. Also writing on biology, especially marine biology, Cwmhiraeth received 390 points for one featured article (Bivalvia) and one good article (pelican), topping up with a large number of did you knows.
Muboshgu (submissions) was third in Pool A. Muboshgu writes primarily on baseball, and this round saw Muboshgu's first featured article, Derek Jeter, promoted on its fourth attempt at FAC.
Dana Boomer (submissions) was fourth in Pool A. She writes on a variety of topics, including horses, but this round also saw the high-importance lettuce reach featured article status.
Sasata (submissions) is another WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist in 2009 and 2010. He writes mostly on mycology.
However, we must also say goodbye to the eight who did not make the final, having fallen at the last hurdle: 
GreatOrangePumpkin (submissions), 
Ealdgyth (submissions), Calvin999 (submissions), 
Piotrus (submissions), 
Toa Nidhiki05 (submissions), 
12george1 (submissions), 
The Bushranger (submissions) and 
1111tomica (submissions). We hope to see you all next year.
On the subject of next year, a discussion has been opened here. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:12, 1 September 2012 (UTC)