User talk:Johnbod/28

Lion man of the Hohlenstein Stadel

It might be worth looking into as the Basque compromise part of the last of the Cro Magnon lineage--Protolock (talk) 05:38, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Or even Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Redbranch1984/Archive. Dougweller (talk) 19:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Clan Leslie

Hi there I noticed that you added Walter Leslie of the 17th century to the Clan Leslie article. Please can you add a source citation for the info you have added as I would like to keep the article well referenced. Remember any unsourced info can be removed from Wikipedia. I do not want to remove it because it is a good addition to the clan article, so please add a source. Thanks. QuintusPetillius (talk) 20:24, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift response.QuintusPetillius (talk) 21:12, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Sperlonga sculptures

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Feast of Herod with the Beheading of St John the Baptist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Catholic League

Santa Costanza (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Acanthus

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 14:58, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Venus of Willendorf may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• figure estimated to have been made between about 28,000 and 25,000 [[Before Common Era|BCE]].<ref>[[http://smarthistory.khanacademy.org/nude-woman-venus-of-willendorf.html Nude Woman (Venus of

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:19, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Commentary on the Apocalypse may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[[Gerona Beatus]] or ''Beatus'' of Távara]]. Ca. 975. Cathedral of [[Girona]]. Archives. Ms. 7. 260 x 400 mm. 280 leaves. 160 miniatures.
• * ''Rylands Beatus'' [R]: Manchester, [[John Rylands Library]] Latin MS 8), ca. 1175,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:42, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Antiquarian may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• only in an [[Adjective|adjectival]] sense).<ref>First [[OED]] uses of "Antiquary. 3" 1586 and 1602)</ref> From the second half of the 18th century, however, "antiquarian" began to be used more

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:54, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Adoration of the Magi (Veronese) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[File:Paolo Veronese - Adoration of the Magi - WGA24820 top rightpped).jpg|thumb|left|Detail, top left]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:46, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Infobox discussion

Hello John. I've replied to your comment. Given that we had 2 editors chime in to my proposed change, can you think of other locations where we can post notices of the discussion. Please let me know. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 15:55, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Village Pump certainly, otherwise I'm not sure. You could do a RFC. The trouble is the Infobox project has few members, and really only those who are strongly pro-infobox and "big data". I take it you atre familiar with the Arbcom case this year? Johnbod (talk) 16:58, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Not familiar with the Arbcom case. Can you provide a link? In the meantime, I'll consider an RFC/Pump notice. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

(watching, and ec) I am afraid that nobody is familiar with that case ;) - For example, the two arbs seeking reelection looked at a fact from that case well when asked about it, but were obviously not disturbed when a colleague mentioned the same (helpful, stopping an argument) edit as a reason to ban, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

ps: no need to study the case: it was not about infoboxes. - Those opposing infoboxes also watch the MOS talk, - the archives of it are probably more helpful than the case to get a feeling for disputes (example pictured) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:23, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

John – don't open the link Gerda has provided! It is a WP:TLDR discussion!! (I'm kidding with you Gerda. Thanks.) – S. Rich (talk) 17:29, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Interesting: you ask the one who was the first to answer an innocent question not to look? - If you think that is long, don't go to the case which is archived under "pride and prejudice II" on my user page (and don't miss my own infobox there) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:36, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

This is the Arbcom case. I'm not sure whether you should read it or weight it, but it does cast light on the issues and passions infoboxes give rise to. Johnbod (talk) 17:39, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I do see the passion – egad, I had no idea. Well, my proposed clarification did not generate much steam, so I thought I could implement it. At present I'm going to wait a few days and see what interest there is. We might get enough commentary – hopefully, dispassionate commentary – to get a consensus for the small improvement I propose. If not, I'll post something at the Pump. Thank you, John & Gerda, for opening this rather interesting closet. – S. Rich (talk)

DYK for Art Nouveau furniture

Materialscientist (talk) 05:20, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Feast of Herod with the Beheading of St John the Baptist

Gatoclass (talk) 16:47, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Bartholomeus Strobel

Gatoclass (talk) 16:47, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Bone char

It seems too gradual a spike to be bot-generated, but it still could be. On the other hand, a quick scan of google hits in the last month suggests that bone char has become an issue for a) vegans, because it is used in the manufacture of refined sugar and b) conspiracy theorists, who use it to remove fluoride from their drinking water. Serendi^podous 21:48, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

I can see the interest, but I don't believe that's new - the 3rd ghit dates to 1997, and there aren't that many vegans in the world I'd say. Cheers anyway, Johnbod (talk) 21:52, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Bronze Head from Ife (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Yoruba

Cabinet of curiosities (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Microcosm

Commentary on the Apocalypse (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Castile

Gourd (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Snuff

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Humanism Article

Hi Johnbod . . . I was reading the comments at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Humanism#Merger_proposal and noticed that you Opposed merging the article because "That article seems misnamed, gathering a bunch of different not-very-notable theorists with little in common. Johnbod (talk) 04:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)" so I wanted to get feedback on what name you thought might be appropriate and why you consider Carl Rogers, Abraham Maslow, William Glasser, etc. not notable theorists? I, too, oppose the merger but for very different reasons.Stmullin (talk) 22:13, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Infobox abuse

Say, John, for real infobox abuse, see University of California Police Department! – S. Rich (talk) 03:45, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - that is extreme. Bizarre. I also noticed "Panty raids were considered[by whom?] to be a major student disturbance."! Johnbod (talk) 05:10, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I missed the panty raids, both in the article and when going to college. While I've tagged the article, I'm going to let someone else fix it. Cheers. – S. Rich (talk) 05:29, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination

Paolo Veronese, Adoration of the Magi, 1573, my Christmas card to all, with best wishes for the festive season and the New Year!

Hi Johnbod, I just moved your DYK nomination from the 'special holding area' into the date of 16 December (hopefully I've managed to do it correctly but no doubt someone will shout if I haven't!). A nomination is moved into the special holding area after it is approved. SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:27, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thanks! Johnbod (talk) 15:32, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations

Well done on becoming a WIR John. Nice to see a wiki editor (and not just a facebook/wiki talk editor) getting a turn. Victuallers (talk) 19:49, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Cheers! (he means https://blog.wikimedia.org.uk/2013/12/royal-society-appoints-wikimedian-in-residence/). Johnbod (talk) 20:03, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Best wishes

to all for Christmas, New Year & etc! My card is Adoration of the Magi (Veronese). Johnbod (talk) 20:03, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

ϢereSpielChequers is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec13}} to your friends' talk pages.

DYK for Proper right

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:47, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Holiday Cheer

		Holiday Cheer
		Victuallers talkback is wishing a new WIR Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. - Vic/Roger

Merry Christmas

		Happy Holidays
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:49, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Wardour Street (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to National Portrait Gallery and Veronese

Adoration of the Magi (Veronese) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Accademia

Christ in the winepress (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Frontispiece

San Silvestro, Venice (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Accademia

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at this!

Gothic secular and domestic architecture.

Isn't that nice? We've needed it for a long time and now it has happened!

Re "Impression: Sunrise", the notion that the image should be deleted is a red-herring. It has never been suggested. Amandajm (talk) 23:33, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations

I just heard about the WiR position - congratulations! - PKM (talk) 05:01, 23 December 2013 (UTC) (not dead yet)

Happy Christmas!

Season's Greetings and best wishes for the New Year.

NSW Christmas bush

Whiteghost.ink (talk) 00:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Let me add my solstitial greetings!--Wetman (talk) 15:31, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_November_22#Category:Horse_burials

I know it's been open a while, but is there any change of reverting your close just now of this one - I've only just seen it & I'd like to support a keep. I see no reason why it can't expand, & Jerry Pepsi's arguments in particular are rather odd. Very narrowly balanced comments - ie nom +1 vs 2 keeps. Cheers. Johnbod (talk) 20:03, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. And Happy Holidays : )

Though it wasn't explicit in your comments, I'll take them partially as a request for clarification of the close : )

(And while it likely goes without saying as you and I have interacted here and there for years now...) In determining consensus, I don't count votes.

By my read, not one commenter felt that the current name was appropriate. And rename and merge are both deletes when dealing with categories. The consensus wasn't clear to outright delete (as you note), but consensus clearly wasn't to outright keep either. But there clearly was consensus to make a change, and merging had the most support.

All that said, this is "Categories for discussion", so if in the future there are a.) (as you suggest) articles to expand this WP:SMALLCAT, and b.) (as relevant to the current discussion) there is some sort of proposal for a name (and thus clear inclusion criteria per WP:CAT) which will gain consensus, please feel free to bring it up again.

But an addition of "Keep, I see no reason why it can't expand" likely wouldn't change the discussion outcome in this case.

All that said, I welcome your further thoughts. - jc37 20:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

There was 1 K or Upmerge, 1 "Keep but perhaps rename", so I don't agree with your reading, nor do I see that "there clearly was consensus to make a change". I would have been a straight Keep (or rename to the singular), as this is the correct name in archaeology - see the plentiful examples on google. Apart from the nom, the single delete vote had frankly silly arguments -anyone who thinks Sutton Hoo was an "event" or a single burial obviously has never looked at the article. I can see at least 4 articles that certainly should be there (with chariot burial), and a number of others that can be added without stretching. Johnbod (talk) 20:43, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Setting aside your disagreement with the close for a moment (and you are of course welcome to nominate the close at DRV if you wish), I just received a note from someone else concerning the category in question (see: User_talk:Montanabw#Horse_categories.) I think they have a great suggestion concerning discussing it at WP:WPEQ. And if you feel that there are more possible appropriate members for the category (as you note above), even moreso.

As I mentioned above, cfd stands for categories for discussion. So if, after discussing this at WPEQ you feel you have a decent case to make per support there, please feel free to bring it back to cfd (or drv if you prefer) where it can be discussed amongst the broader community to see what the community consensus is on it.

I hope this helps. - jc37 07:51, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, I don't think it does much, but thanks anyway. Commented there. Johnbod (talk) 10:29, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

The link is WT:EQUINE (We have to get the other nickname to link, one of these days). I've noticed that the deletionists seem to be in full roar over at CfD, same people on everything, vote the same way. Troublesome. Montanabw^(talk) 20:51, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Adoration of the Magi (Veronese)

Harrias ^talk 00:03, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

[1]...Modernist (talk) 03:11, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

TFA tweak??

Saw the range of possible birth dates (( (7–2 BC to 30–33 AD) )) was removed from lede of TFA, I don't want to wade into the article because I've not worked on it, but I see you are active and patrolling it, plus you have been supporting the pre-TFA version at talk, so wanted to ping you about this. I saw there was a discussion, but no consensus. I'd favor restoring it, but, as I say, don't really want to wade into it, so just pinging you. Your call.  ;-) And... Merry Christmas! Montanabw^(talk) 21:04, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't look after the article generally, & haven't read that debate, but I did wonder about that edit. I've been doing things I probably should have done at FAC or since. I'm not the best person I'm afraid. Johnbod (talk) 23:24, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Well reverted anyway. Merry Christmas to you too! Hope the horses aren't cold. Johnbod (talk) 00:37, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

They are happy, as long as they have food and can go in their barn when they feel like it, I get no complaints from whinny-land! LOL! Thanks. Montanabw^(talk) 06:19, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Raphael edit

With regards to the death of Margarita Luti, it is known that Raphael left money in his will to her when he died. Luti's date of death is currently unknown, however it is generally accepted that Raphael died first.

Your edit concerned Maria Bibbiena, not Luti, and she died before Raphael, if only shortly so. Johnbod (talk) 12:52, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Best wishes

	Belated happy christmas and best for the new year
	Wishing the best for 2014 and just deligted to see the new position, its certainly well deserved and well earned. Thanks for all the help again this year, and you are certianly backed by the VA community. Ceoil (talk) 23:47, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Grove Art

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Grove Art requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. freshacconci talk to me 03:27, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but didn't you look at the history? This is a necessary redirect & should not be deleted. Johnbod (talk) 03:40, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Esquiline Treasure, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constantine (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) 09:00, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Coronation of King Edward VII and "medievalizing"

Thanks for your edit on Coronation of King Edward VII and Queen Alexandra - it's still a work in progress. I hadn't put in anything about reviving old traditions in the coronation service - I was looking for a good reference. I could only find David Starkey's Monarchy: From the Middle Ages to Modernity (from a sneaky look in a bookshop) which mentions the revival of the "Vivats" last used for (I think) Charles I, however I don't have access to a copy. I read elsewhere that there was a proposal to reinstate the King's Champion in full armour, but that was rejected; again I don't have a concrete ref for that. I'm sure this also ties in with the Oxford Movement in the CofE, but I'm damned if I can find anything about that either. If you can help with any of the above, I would be very grateful. Alansplodge (talk) 16:22, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Added some at the talk page. I did Coronation of Queen Victoria & you will find a sentence by Roy Strong in the linked essay there. Hope that helps. Johnbod (talk) 17:22, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:Textile artists

You seem to be deliberately confusing matters here! The Category:Textile workers is clearly used to contain workers in the textile industry i.e. mill workers, industrial weavers...

Textile artists are artists that use textiles in their artwork. Category:Textile artists shouldn't be a sub-category of Category:Textile workers. Sionk (talk) 15:11, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Nonsense - "artists" are workers too. This is a wholly false distinction. See my comments at the CFD discussion. This is especially the case as many of the "workers" were only incidentally in the textile industry before becoming notable for something else, which will also be true for many of the "artists". These are in any case absurd 18th-century distinctions. If you feel unhappy I suggest you take the matter to the Textile project. Johnbod (talk) 15:14, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Portrait of a Commander

Hello! Your submission of Portrait of a Commander at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 01:08, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

January shivers

I've recently thrown myself at William Burges' furniture and am in the process of creating the Zodiac settle article. I've noticed that most UK Govt images are free use but this one [2] is all rights reserved. Is this something you're au fait with? Writing about Burges without images is like an exercise in textual redundancy. Happy New Year! Gareth E Kegg (talk) 18:48, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, no, except that it would be easier to find a local in Bedford to photograph it in the museum than to get the licence changed on existing photos. Fae or WereSpiel might know more. Johnbod (talk) 19:38, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Augsburg engraver

Here's to a prosperous and serene New Year, Johnbod! I noted an engraver's monogram in the sophisticated and sleek late Mannerist title page to Bayer's Uranometria (Augsburg 1603): see Talk:Uranometria#Engraver's monogram. It's in the shadows of the central scroll at base, at left, with the date MDCIII at right. At maximum pixel count I'm reading it as LMT. Do you, or does any lurker here, have access to Nagler, Monogrammisten?--Wetman (talk) 21:47, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

No, but I thought it might be a Durer-esque A, & see this. This search gets plenty more. Happy New Year! Johnbod (talk) 03:33, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Of course! AMF, Alexander Mair fecit". I fixed it crediting you.--Wetman (talk) 03:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I suspect just AM - he copied Bayer's drawings, so it should be "del." not "fec.", no? Johnbod (talk) 04:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

	Happy New Year, 2014
	Heres to Happy Collaborations! Amandajm (talk) 05:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC) The Epiphany window from St Andrew's Cathedral, Sydney, John Hardman and Co. of Birmingham, 1860s

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lycurgus Cup may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• fragments of Roman dichroic glass vary considerably in their two colours.<ref>Freestone, 275; [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Ij5xe1V9Kw4C&pg=PA65&dq=Dichroic+Lycurgus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:38, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Portrait of a Commander

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Cobbe Portrait Page

Dear John, I've added a few details of the Cobbe and its copies, of Wells' proposal, with citations to the exhibition catalog and the review of the catalog in Shakespeare Quarterly. I believe the revisions are narrowly based on the literature, and do a better job of explaining the internal evidence provided by the paintings. Comments welcome. Happy New Year. Chris Thompson, University of Toronto 138.51.85.201 (talk) 04:55, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Angels in art (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hand of God

Cobbe Portrait (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Doublet

Jean Hey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Lyons

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

You may need these to reinvigorate yourself following your fabulous work reviewing Early Netherlandish painting. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:39, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Johnbod (talk) 01:40, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

WTF. Aren't you in the UK? Do you never sleep?? No wonder you manage to do so much fantastic work here!! Hope you take a break sometime soon, though... hamiltonstone (talk) 01:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Chartered Financial Analyst Article

Hi Johnbod, I am trying to understand your rationale for the changes to the Chartered Financial Analyst article. It's true that the CFA has more test centers in the USA than in other countries, but it has test centers in what looks like ~100 countries . Also the headquarters are in Virginia, but the CFA Institute has offices in London, Hong Kong and New York. I can't find a demographic breakdown of CFAs, but these profiles seem to suggest they come from all around: . I'm not trying to start an edit war, but I've never heard the opinion that the CFA is somehow limited to the United States before. Thanks! ThoseArentMuskets (talk) 15:48, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Image for Bach cantatas

Duccio

I archived the Christmas card with "your" image. Next: all Bach cantatas for next Sunday (BWV 154, 124, 32) deal with loss and longing: the parents of Jesus having lost their son, 12 years old. I find many images of the boy with the "doctors" but none of the desperate parents searching. Would you know one? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:01, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

No, I don't think so - the finding was the subject, sorry! The one illustrated stresses the search more than most, as do other late medieval ones. Johnbod (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for trying, - this is good but too far off in time, I will keep the church image then, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:29, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Different question: would you know how Sorrow (Van Gogh) is or should be called in German? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:44, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, no. Johnbod (talk) 02:12, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I found it myself, finally: the painter himself called it "Sorrow" - on the work. It fits, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:38, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Marco Basaiti

Based on your edit summary, I referenced the hypothesis Basaiti might be of Albanian origin in his article and I would appreciate if you could review my edits. I think we have some over-referencing of his Greek (and Albanian) origin in the article (his ethnicity should be marginally relevant), and I would remove the dictionnary ones, which are based on scholar work anyways, but I would like to know your thoughts first. Thanks for your work! --Perkohesisht ai i vjetri (talk) 18:33, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

I've adjusted to better reflect what seems to be the balance of current scholarship. Are you sure Basinger actually supports the idea? If he does his paper has not had much impact after 60 years or so. I hope I don't have to edit further on this topic. Johnbod (talk) 22:32, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Franz Babinger actually supports the idea. His article says it in the title "L'origine albanese del pittore Marco Basaiti (ca. 1470 - ca. 1530)", and other authors (Pacini, referenced) have agreed with him (brought quote of Pacini ("L'opinione di F. Babinger (*) secondo cui il pittore veneziano Marco Basaiti, il quale operò intorno agli anni 1500-1530, fosse di origine albanese, a mio avviso trova conferma nel fatto che Bazaiti appare ancor oggi come nome di famiglia nella città di Delvina"). Babinger used (and developed further) the work of Giuseppe Valentini (albanologist), who had researched Vatican archives on many Albanian personalities in Italy from the 14th through the 19th century, but I can't find the original work of Valentini, unfortunately, although I searched. It may be within Actae Albania Veneta, but I'm not sure. However Babinger vetted Valentini as he was internationally way more famous than Valentini. --Perkohesisht ai i vjetri (talk) 00:44, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Stats.grok.se down

Hello, I saw your post at the Village Pump and I thought I would say hello to you again. I use the traffic reports in my work as a Wikipedian in Residence and I thought that your interest might be similar. There might be overlap in what we do, as I contribute content from medical societies to Wikipedia. If you ever have interest, then contact me sometime. I would be curious to learn what you are doing and if we have any common ground for collaboration, either in sharing scientific information or in our need for stats. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:03, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I've commented again there. Only done 1 day so far at RS! I'm only 1 day per week. Do you know how to get numbers/listing of all links to another website on WP? That would be handy now. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 15:10, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Just one day per week? Do they not have more interest in a crowdsourced project which has linked to them over 1600 times without them before now acknowledging the fanbase that did this for them? I am just teasing; I know you are there to begin having these conversations with them. All big organizations are usually surprised at what their fans have been doing without oversight. The main page is at Special:LinkSearch. Something else which might impress them is a report of the traffic of the pages which describe topics close to the Royal Society's identity and culture. Let me know if you have other thoughts. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - I found it after asking, & forgot to say. It's a "pilot" excercise for now. Johnbod (talk) 17:21, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Amaravati Marbles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mara

Lion Capital of Asoka (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Four Yogas

The Reformation and art (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to United Provinces

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, Johnbod. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Early Popes of Rome as head of the Catholic Church - opinion versus fact. Thank you. --Gold Standard 00:32, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry

I screwed up on the day. Do you think it would be possible to try again for next week? Serendi^podous 15:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Sure, can you come on Wednesday around 3.00 to 3.15 for a 3.30 start, finishing at 5. I'll get them to leave you a pass. Thanks, Johnbod (talk) 15:29, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Agriculture

Hi Johnbod - If you have a few minutes, would you mind checking out the new version of the History section at Agriculture. I've added quite a bit on the BAR, and would like your opinion as to if it's too much, not enough, or just right. Another user commented on the talk page and seems to like it. I think it's a little much, but if others are happy with it, then I won't be upset. Also, am I being thin-skinned in thinking Noodleki is beginning to be disruptive with their edits and lack of talk page interaction since the initial few exchanges? If so, please feel free to slap me with a trout... If you don't have the time/interest (to take a look at the article, not to slap me with a trout!), it is completely understood... Dana boomer (talk) 23:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Early Netherlandish painting

Was promoted last night. Your expert review was more than I and Victoria could have expected. There are a few o/s points that we are mindful of. Thank you. Ceoil (talk) 11:54, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Well done both! A sterling effort. Johnbod (talk) 12:53, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Huge thanks Johnbod! I made a fancy templatey thing with a pretty picture, but it doesn't seem to convey how much I appreciate the time and effort you put in. It's a much better article because of your review. Victoria (tk) 17:15, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hitching a lift on this sub-heading, I smiled wryly at the difference between my own pedantic comments on the prose and your superbly scholarly remarks, which impressed me mightily. Wonderful input. Tim riley (talk) 22:02, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks both! Johnbod (talk) 23:46, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mr and Mrs Andrews, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fan (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) 13:30, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Romanesque architecture

Thank you John! That bloody reproduction had completely caught me out. I'll have to look harder next time. Amandajm (talk) 05:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I didn't spot it until someone pointed it out at Sculpture, where I'd added it. I had to change it at various places on en:wp - the old one is still used in many languages. Johnbod (talk) 13:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

A colourful FRS

John Sheldon (anatomist), new: of course it is really a sad story rather than pure eccentricity. I thought it might have some training value. Charles Matthews (talk) 09:55, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but it a bit too good. What I'm having trouble finding is a reliable source of articles with simple prose issues. I thought categories for Polish/Malian/Fooian biologists etc would work, but they don't. Any thoughts? Johnbod (talk) 12:37, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

For dud prose, I google the site for "it is important to note that", which is a sign of verbiage: a high hit for me today is body language, which is certainly a stinker from the point of view of the writing alone. It doesn't show up that many biographies, if that is a desideratum. Perhaps some combination or variant would do it.

About Sheldon, I was thinking more along the lines of RS, because I suspect that not all those I'm using currently are quite right. Charles Matthews (talk) 15:18, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

• LOL! Johnbod (talk) 15:35, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Re: Coronation of Queen Victoria

You're very welcome. I started on the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II which only mentioned Zadok the Priest and I was glad. In researching it, I found the fascinating story of how coronations celebrate and inspire British music. I've now written articles about the coronations of Edward VII and George VI. I wonder what the next one will be like? Alansplodge (talk) 14:04, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Amaravati Marbles

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Perspective (artisitc)...

Have things changed since I took art history? I was always taught it was Giotto (and his pals) who first did artistic perspective (and our article on same says that also, albeit unsourced). You're the expert on art history - in double checking this part of this edit: "In 1259 the author of Boyana frescoes has done a spectacular revolution in the history of European art as a discovered the upward perspective and three-dimensionality in the visual arts" the new thought on the history of perspective? Ealdgyth - Talk 14:56, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

The UNESCO listing linked at the bottom of the page & other sources mention general "realism" within a Byzantine-orbit context but not perspective specifically - the images I've seen mostly from Boyana Church arrange their figures across the front of the picture space in the usual style. Sources talk of a revival of Late Antique illusionism (again - see the Paris Psalter of 300 years earlier in Constantinople, which goes a good deal further), but that's a long way short of consistent graphical perspective, which the Italians can still be credited with (post-Giotto). There's a vaguer increase in the sense of depth and three-dimensionalty, which Boyana can claim, though whether it had influence on similar developments in the West is pretty questionable I'd have thought. I'd be interested to see what Amandajm will make of it; she's also expert in this area. Unfortunately Balkan art history tends to be dominated by a nationalist agenda. Johnbod (talk) 16:40, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mr and Mrs Andrews, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages River Stour and Home farm (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) 08:59, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Warning

Re your edit-summary comment in Byzantine dress: see WP:PERSONAL and do not repeat. "fascinating" is a personal-POV adjective and may not be used here. One could just as easily substitute "unspeakably boring" or other personal reactions, but none are allowed in an encyclopedia. Thanks. Rep07 (talk) 08:16, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Boy, you really are a jerk. Johnbod (talk) 15:18, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

...of epic proportions according to this contribs page DeCausa (talk) 16:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Rep07 (talk) 21:54, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Mathilde Cross...

I gathered some sources to write an article on this soon. Just need to get unburied from real life work. Do you know of anything book-related I should be getting through ILL? I scoured JSTOR for articles, of course. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:42, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

I have Lasko, Peter, Ars Sacra, 800–1200, Penguin History of Art (now Yale), 1972 (nb, 1st edn.) ISBN14056036X, & can add from that; he has a couple of pages, drawings of the backs etc. Also I think other stuff, though I forget exactly what. There will be reams in German. There are 2 Mathilde crosses, probably best taken together, usually called the "first" and "second", fairly similar and both at Essen. MA shows the second. There is also a 3rd similar cross with no named donor, but perhaps also given by her. Then there's the "Theophanu-Kreuz" given by Empress Theophanu. The first is captioned by Lasko "Altar cross of Abbess Mathilde and Duke Otto" - her brother Otto I, Duke of Swabia and Bavaria. One might cover the crosses under a biography perhaps, or by expanding Essen Cathedral Treasury. No doubt you realize both were grandchildren of Eadgyth. German WP has comprehensive-looking articles on all three: Otto-Mathilden-Kreuz (first), Mathildenkreuz (second), and Kreuz_mit_den_gro%C3%9Fen_Senkschmelzen (third cross), as well as a biography. Ideally one could get those translated, but I don't know who to ask. Johnbod (talk) 17:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

User:Gerda Arendt might be an option. I certainly don't read German...Ealdgyth - Talk 18:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Good idea, though she usually sticks close to her music. Johnbod (talk) 18:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

I will look tomorrow, but promised a painter, - celebration today. Besides music, I wrote this year about a mayor who died, a bishop who opposed the pope (see my user page) and Sorrow, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:29, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

That would be great Gerda! Johnbod (talk) 19:26, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Move Like This
by 28bytes

I also translated dangerous blue duck attack, hitting the German Main page right now, on the 28th, naturally, - a little more patience for the above, please --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:26, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

As an aside, Bulgaria (also Preslav and Sofia) are strangely missing from Lasko's index, though his period includes most of Empire I & the best of II. Johnbod (talk) 19:36, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

I forgot User:Furius, who does lots of art translations (ancient and medieval) from German, & I've dropped him a line. Johnbod (talk) 12:29, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I think it doesn't hurt to have at least stubs here, for the connection to the treasures. I lack a lot of vocabulary in English for the art etc. Starting, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

First to play with, more tomorrow, tell me if first more stubs, or more of this one, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Interesting stuff! I'll try and produce some translations over the next week. Of course, even when I do, they'll need a bit of work - German wikipedia seems to have far laxer citation standards than en.wiki. Furius (talk) 01:48, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Let's look together. I took the article titles from the treasury and suggest one for the lady, please check and watch

• Cross of Otto and Mathilde
• Cross of Mathilde
• Mixed Enamel Cross -> Senkschmelz Cross, see below
• Mathilde II (Essen) (de:Mathilde II. (Essen))

As a DYK person, I try to first say basics, then improve one at a time (lady first?), but I feel like a guest here ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:16, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I wonder if the lady ought to be Matilda II, Abbess of Essen (to match, e.g. Matilda, Abbess of Quedlinburg). I tend to produce full translations, but sometimes they take a while. I might start with Otto and Mathilde's cross and you could start with the lady? Furius (talk) 17:18, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Let's think about it. You see above that I started both articles mentioned. Or do you mean start expanding? For expanding, I would prefer the lady, as the technical terms of goldsmith work is not what I would know in English. Name: I would support Mathilde, 1) because I like names untranslated in general for the original flavour, 2) because the two crosses are named after her, 3) because a German article I saw today distinguishes her from her niece Matilda, - it would be nice to be able to do the same, 4) because the many German sources will have that name. - Is Abbess a title that would be capital? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, yes, I meant start expanding (I mean, if you want to do that - please don't feel obliged!). Your arguments in support of Mathilde are good. Capitalising "Abbess" feels more natural to me. Furius (talk) 00:54, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Great stuff everybody! I think there was only one Mathilde, Abbess of Essen, which is what I'd favour, but we should probably continue this on the talk there. That is what Lasko (see above) calls her. I may not be able to add much until the weekend. Johnbod (talk) 02:48, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I take this discussion to the article talk at this point, because there is a related question, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

User:Johnbod points out that he's never seen the term Mixed Enamel Cross. I think I picked the name when I was translating Essen Cathedral Treasury and it's not a happy choice. The German calls it Kreuz mit den großen Senkschmelzen (Cross with the large Senkschmelzen) or Senkschmelzen-Kreuz (Senkschmelzen Cross), with "Senkschmelzen" being the name for a specific enamelling technique. The word literally means "sunken enamel" or "low enamel" or some such, and the German wikipedia contains a whole two lines on it: "In Senkschmelz (French: émail mixté) depressions are driven into the very thin ground-plate with the help of a flat punch. Then, as in cloisonee, these depressions are provided with wires and the cells thereby created are filled with enamel and fired." Obviously I took my lead in the translation from the claimed French term, but it actually sounds like Senkschmelz is equivalent to Champlevé. Neither Cross with the large Champlevé Enamels, nor Champlevé Enamel Cross sound very good to me, but I don't think Mixed Enamel Cross can stand either. It can't be left untranslated because with translated the other crosses. Any ideas? Furius (talk) 10:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

It's tricky, & I can't find anything very specific on it. Lasko talks of "the magnificent 'sunk' enamel plaques..." (of another piece), and the German description indeed sounds "mixed" - the first sentence the same as champlevé, but the second as cloisonné. Another V&A book I have talks of a Trier piece that uses 2 plates, one with the outlines of the design cut out, which is placed onto a plain one & filled in with cloisonné. There doesn't seem to be a standard English term for the technique, nor name for the cross. I'll poke around a bit. Johnbod (talk) 12:19, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Double hmmm! I can't find any source in English giving the "Mixed Enamel Cross" a proper name, & I'd suggest just using Essen enamelled cross until one turns up. I've found & added to cloisonné better definitions of vollschmelz and senkschmelz at least. Johnbod (talk) 15:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, enamelled cross could really apply to all of them to greater or lesser degrees. If Senkschmelz is the commonly used term for the technique in English, as your edit to the cloisonee page states, then why not call it the Senkschmelz Cross? That's a bit more distinctive and keeps us close to one of the German names (Senkschmelzen-Kreuz) Furius (talk) 22:34, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Actually I now see Lasko refers to it as "...the altar cross with large enamels...". We should try to find something an English RS actually uses, or nearly does, and "Senkschmelz Cross" as a proper name is not found by Prof. Google, and could equally mean many other crosses, like this one. I'd use Cross with Large Enamels, Essen Cathedral - that seems to be what some dude on Flickr says the Cathedral Treasury themselves use (bottom of page), as well they might. Johnbod (talk) 22:47, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I've translated the page at Senkschmelz Cross - please move it to where you think it ought to be. Furius (talk) 00:53, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I saw. Many thanks for your fantastic work here! Unless it's going up for DYK, I think I'll wait & look for more references to it in English, but at the moment the "large enamels" route seems to best reflect usage. Johnbod (talk) 13:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Quite the little Ottonian landslide you started, Ealdgyth! I've also been bulking up Egbert (Archbishop of Trier), Mathilde's contemporary, & the go-to guy for enamels. Poor DYK readers, they won't know what's hit them. Great thanks to Furius & Gerda! Johnbod (talk) 15:11, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

WPEditor's cyberbullying

Dear Johnbod, I'm stuck away in Asia with limited internet contact (for this kind of message anyway). WPEditor has reversed the change to Common Era dates at both Aesop and Aesop's Fables with the excuse that the question has not been discussed, let alone consensus reached. Since you were involved in the discussion, I wonder if you feel like taking the question up again. I'll leave a similar message with others who took part. It seems that this stickler for 'rules' is only going to respect his own obtuse interpretation of them. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 11:45, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I've done Aesop - the case at the fables is less clear, as you suggested in 2012 that follows the biog, but this was not commented on by others. I'd start a section there maybe, saying that consensus there would apply to subsidiary articles. Johnbod (talk) 12:05, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

This is canvassing and therefore your opinion on this issue has been tainted, Johnbod. Therefore you have no place participating in Mzilikazi's 2nd Aesop edit war. You were wrong in what you wrote on the other pages anyway. (WP Editor 2011 (talk) 00:14, 29 January 2014 (UTC))

Johnbod, you've created a much bigger mess of Aesop's Fables and Aesop than what Mzilikazi had created. Even if he hadn't canvassed you, the fact that you know pretty much none of the details of his first edit war should have been enough reason for you to avoid blindly shooting your mouth off. As I've said elsewhere, Talk:Aesop's Fables did not represent the entire discussion. You must immediately revert this change to Aesop if you want to claim any legitimacy in this issue, since it was done on the basis of Mzilikazi canvassing you and feeding you cherry-picked "information".(WP Editor 2011 (talk) 00:19, 29 January 2014 (UTC))

For the benefit of anyone reading this page in isolation, In May/June 2012, Mzilikazi1939's 1.5-year-long edit war surrounding the articles Aesop and Aesop's Fables came to an end after I noticed what had been going on, reverted the changes that he had been enforcing by bullying and argued with him on several different pages. He finally conceded defeat here, after his canvassing, lying, suggestions of article ownership and misleading complaints to administrators all failed. Up until the last month of his 1.5-year edit war, he kept his hijacked version of the articles in place by bullying other editors away 123456...11.

He has started a second edit war by using his sock puppet User:Afkun and, now that I've realised it and am trying to protect the articles once more, he has reverted to canvassing likely allies like Johnbod here with cherry-picked details about the first conflict, as if to pretend he didn't lose. (WP Editor 2011 (talk) 01:03, 29 January 2014 (UTC))

The consensus at Talk:Aesop#B.2FCE_dates is clear, as is your block history, which will be getting longer if you keep this up. Johnbod (talk) 08:15, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I gave you the chance to show good faith and gain legitimacy but now you've refused. Stop edit warring; you must establish consensus on the relevant talk page(s) if you and Mzilikazi want to change those articles. My block history is irrelevant; that's an ad hominem fallacy and it's not clear anyway, since it confused Dougweller.(WP Editor 2011 (talk) 11:02, 29 January 2014 (UTC))

The fact that I was initially confused doesn't obviate that you were blocked for editwarring over WPERA. Most of your edits relate to era style, and even when correct, eg at edit summaries to mislead, eg at Europa Universalis IV your edit summary "improved wording"[3] removed the C.E. era style which was obviously the reason for your edit. You are trying to stifle discussion by saying that canvassed editors can't comment, and the accusation of canvassing is dubious as it is ok to contact "Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics)". Perhaps this needs to go to ANI. Dougweller (talk) 13:12, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

If you insist on talking about that then I must explain. No, I wasn't edit-warring. I was protecting an article from you and your friends, who were the real edit warriors. I brought the article into line with the talk page consensus and Akhilleus (spelling?), who hadn't even participated in the discussion, rammed through his own preferred version with the help of you and your allies, who declared the discussion invalid because you had refused to participate. You only got your way in the Apollo article by one side being blocked from editing; not by establishing consensus. Apollo in its current state has no legitimacy; it is merely the ruins left by Akhilleus' edit war.

Most of my edits relate to era style, do they? I haven't counted, but I'd say ALL of my edits (to actual articles, not talk pages) relate to spelling and grammar. If you want to sub-categorise further, go ahead, but all you're doing is creating an ad hominem argument, which I've reminded you before is irrelevant and fallacious. (WP Editor 2011 (talk) 14:06, 29 January 2014 (UTC))

There seems to be a theme here - all the other editors are edit-warring against me. Of course, you were the one that got blocked over that. And if all your edits are about grammar and spelling, it's odd that so many change era styles. Dougweller (talk) 19:22, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Mzilikazi1939, User:Dougweller and User:Johnbod reported by User:WP Editor 2011 (Result: ). Thank you. (WP Editor 2011 (talk) 00:41, 30 January 2014 (UTC))

Result - WP Editor 2011 blocked for a week. Dougweller (talk) 06:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Putting the NPOVN issue to bed

Hi. I could use a bit of advice if you're willing. It looks to me like we're about done at NPOVN in terms of real issue. If that's the way it seems to you, then there's just the question of which formula is to be the ratified one: yours or Blueboar's. I'd thought about opening an RFC to get input, since discussion seems dry, but that's mostly for conflict resolution so I have doubts that's the right approach. Is it the ordinary thing just to let it be, or would you suggest I just query other prior contributors to ask for eyes? Other idea? Evensteven (talk) 19:25, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the noise. I just decided to go ahead and move to close formally at NPOVN. Thanks, Evensteven (talk) 19:59, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

move to close at NPOVN

The topic whose discussion you contributed to here seeks comment on its proposed resolution with consensus. Thanks. Evensteven (talk) 20:11, 29 January 2014 (UTC)