User talk:Jvhertum/Archive

Welcome, Jvhertum!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions!
You might like to check out our tutorial, a resource created especially for new users like yourself.
You also may want to introduce yourself to the community at the new user log.
If you have any questions, you can ask me on my talk page, or at our questions forum.
I hope very much you enjoy being here with us, and I wish you luck with your contributions.

- zappa.jake at 08:02, Friday, November 22, 2024 (UTC)

Hemony bros.

My thanks in return for writing an excellent article on the Hemonys! It made my job of putting a little more information about them online much easier. Carillonista 00:28, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agri decumates

Thanks for the corrections and adding the map. I knew I'd forgotten something. :-) -- Ekki01 19:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geen dank. Het is een mooi stukje geworden! - Jvhertum 20:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi:

Pain_Man here. I posted the first article on Agri D*ecumates

I didn't realize that there was another contributor other than Ekki. So I'd like to introduce myself. I've always had an admiration for the Dutch; first the 80 yrs war to free yourselves from Spanish tyranny. That's a story that's never taught in our schools and it makes our struggle against Britain (I'm American) seem like a blink of the historical eye. Will and Ariel Durant give it moving coverage in their magisterial, Story of Civilization. And the price paid, while ours was not negligible by any means, was much, much higher. After all, we had no "Council of Blood" or the vicious bigotry of Charles V and his idiot son Felipe Segundo to deal with. As well as the Dutch resistance to Louis XIV bid to be the "arbiter" of Europe, which was so key to the "Sun" King's eventual defeat.

(I don't have a problem with putting the article up with the lower case "d", but I'm still going to use the uppercase because I've always seen it written thusly, but it's hardly a big deal).

It was my first article on wikipedia. But you and Ekki and definitely improved it. I hadn't realized there was this much material on such a small province. The sources I own (and Britannica.com) don't go into nearly the detail you and Ekki have.

I'm proud to be associated with such an accomplishment. Furthemore, I agree with you, this is not a controversial subject, so I see no reason to wait to post the merged version. I don't see how there could be any objections to my request for the reinsertion of a couple of sentences. So with that very, very minor caveat, I say we go forward and put up the merged article.

History is one of my passions. Particularly, Roman, Medieval, the European Dynastic Period, the English and French Englightements and the Soviet Union (with further interests in 19th century diplomacy and my own nation's Civil War, perhaps the most momentous Civil War of the modern period; after all, a divided America would have been far, far less effective in destroying the German bids for European and global mastery.

I hope we can collaborate in the future on other articles and look forward to "speaking" with you further.

Regards,

PainMan 08:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Pls excuse any typos, spelling errors, missing words; I suffer from mild dyslexia and not matter how many times I proof, I always end up missing something. Well, it's late and I have to get my child ready for school in the morning. PM

Hi, thanks a lot for the introduction. My part in this little production is actually quite insubstantial, mostly just tidying up a bit :) My main interests, as far as history goes, are the Dutch Golden Age (I can recommend Simon Schama's "Embarassment of Riches"), as well as the Middle Ages, and the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic eras.

Please let me know if you need help with anything. You can add any further comments on Agri Decumates to the User talk:Ekki01 page.

Take care, Jvhertum 09:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hoi, ik heb de twee artikelen samengevoegd en een aantal overbodige links verwijderd. Ik heb alleen maar nog een vraagje: wat is het probleem met de Celt-link? Groetjes Ekki01 18:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haakje te veel, niet bijzonders. Ik heb het al gecorrigeerd en ook hier en daar nog een paar kleine dingetjes veranderd. Hope that's OK. Het artikel is mooi geworden, goede merge. Jvhertum 21:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're speaking in Dutch!! You must be talking about me! Of course, I'm being facetious. But it's surprising how many English-only speakers make this assumption when hearing foreign languages (alas, sadly, the atrophy of my French and Spanish, which was always, shall we say, half-arsed, has rendered me largely monoligual, although I can still read both languages with some aid from dictionaries).

I read Schama's book on the French Revolution and I saw his series on the History of Britain (wiht the gorgeously illustrated accompanying books).

My problem with Schama is that he tends to make digressions into areas where is not an expert, indeed not very knowledgeable at all, e.g. modern economics, and he tends to use them to take swipes at Britsh and American Conservatives (of which I am one of the latter). I think to do so degrades historigraphy to polemic. And with the blogosphere and 24-hour newscycle, God knows we're not short on pundits and would-be (and wanna-be) pundits.

I've eyed SChama's book on the Dutch Golden Age for years but my experience with his POV-distorted tome on sur la revolution has put me off, perhaps unfairly; tragically, the Dutch Golden Age could never last, there just weren't enough Dutch people in what Napoleon called "the age of the Big Batallions" and with [i]both[/i] English and French emnity, the Netherlands could never hope to hold. The Durants demonstrate this by adducing the falling return on Dutch East India Company stock as Dutch trade existed more and more on British sufferance and choked on French protectionism (under the Corsican).

But how magnificent it was when it did! When Tromp sailed up the Thames, captured the fort at the confluence of the Medway and burnt the British fleet! Superb! Thus he's quite fairly ranked as one of history's greatest, tho' largely forgotten, Admirals. Whereas a failure such as Yamamoto is lionized by conventional wisdom for a sneak attack that would have failed if we hadn't "slept at dawn."

Look forward to working with you in the future. Please contact me whenever you feel like. newsjunkie_lp(at)cox(dot)net.

It's nice to find people who share my passion. There are many criticisms of my people which aren't fair, even libellous. Our disregard of history, even disdain in some, is not one of them. In a forward looking society, the past must, but not inevitably, be a casualty.

PainMan 01:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Theobald Stapleton

Thanks for expanding Theobald Stapleton. Can you think of any articles to put him into now? I put him into Irish orthography and on the disambig page Stapleton, but otherwise the article isn't linked to from any other article. —An gr 22:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yer welcome! No I can't think of any articles, unless you want to add a paragraph about the 1647 sacking to the article about Cashel and mention him in there. Jvhertum 19:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's mentioned at Rock of Cashel and Cromwellian conquest of Ireland already, so I stuck him in there. —An gr 20:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jvhertum

Babingley (river)

Why have you redirected the Page, River Bagingley to Babingley (River). the page was created to explain the river and not the Settlement of Babingley. I am sure you will agree that the lost village probably deserves a page to itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stavros1 (talk • contribs)

Hi, the reason I changed the title to Babingley (river) was because the actual place name is Babingley, nor River Babingley. The river can be referred to as "River Babingley", "the river Babingley", "Babingley river", "the Babingley", etc. so the new name is more accurate.

I agree that the lost village deserves a page to itself, and I hope you will go ahead and add it. This page could be called Babingley (village) and we could perhaps add "see also" tags to the two pages to crosslink the two. I added the information about St. Felix to the Babingley river page because it provides interesting historical and folkoristic background about the river. However, I agree that I went a bit too far and have now removed the sentence that the first church in East Anglia was built in Babingley, because this piece of information is not related to the river itself.

I have to say I am a bit confused by your latest edits. First you added a lot of interesting detail, then you removed it again. I have gone ahead and added your text back in. Please let me know if you disagree. I have also removed the stub tag, as the page is now no longer "stubby" but has plenty of detail.

For future ref, I would really appreciate it if you could please sign your comments on this talk page, so that I know who I am talking to :) Adding your signature and a timestamp is as simple as clicking the signature icon along the top of the text edit field.

Best regards, Jvhertum 09:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let's try another variant - see Talk:Babingley River for justification. Stavros1: a) please learn to sign talk page entries with ~~~~, and b) never create multiple copies of an article (I found River Babingley and River Babingley (Norfolk)); learn about #redirect. -- RHaworth 11:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Babingley River

Hello Jvhertum I have just read your explanation as to why you changed the title River Babingley to Babingley river and find your reasons rather picky and exacting. I have edited several pages about Norfolk rivers, and all had stubs that started 'River'....... also It is a likely that more people will look for a 'River' with it name second. How many people would put 'Thames River' in to a search engine, rather than the 'River Thames', not many I Suspect. As for your observations about my editing the problems I encountered where due to the fact that we were in conflict at the time, and all the detail that I had included had been over-edited by you. It is now back as it was and your futher information is more than welcome.As for the lost village, I had not come across it before I started Editing the River Page, and so know little about it. Best RegardsStavros1 00:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picky and exacting are my middle names ;)

You seem to have missed part of this discussion. As you can see from the item above, Babingley (river), and the article history, not I but RHaworth changed the page title to Babingley River. This reflects the name given in the UK Ordinance Survey, which surely is a reliable source.

As far as your argument that the page would be easier found under one name or another, you seem to be unaware that when a page is renamed, the old page becomes a redirect and so still works. See Help:Moving a page.

Regards, Jvhertum 14:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

Hi, I noticed you're picking up a lot of articles that don't seem to be notable. Thanks for that! I was wondering whether you were aware of Criteria for Speedy Deletion A7 that states that if an article about a group of people does not assert the importance of the subject, then it can be deleted. You can use {{db-a7}} to nominate the articles for speedy deletion. Note that if the artice does attempt to assert some notability, even if the notability is contested, then prod or AFD are more appropriate. Thanks for the hard work! --Deskana (For Great Justice!) 21:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks. Great tip! Jvhertum 21:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Friedrich Kellner

What a pleasure for me when I discovered what you had done. I cannot thank you enough for all the help you have provided in making the Nederlands Friedrich Kellner article conform to proper Dutch usage and also to Wikipedia standards. It is such an important topic, but yet I was afraid the article would be erased because of the many grammatical errors. Yours was truly a kind deed, and I certainly appreciate it. Thank you. Scott Kellner (Dr. Robert Scott Kellner, College Station, Texas --Rskellner 17:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome!

Machine translated text can be quite hilarious, which I"m sure was not the intended effect ;)

Jvhertum 21:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lytton and Kluskus First Nation

Hi; saw your removal of the section headings from these articles, and of course I understand why in an abstract Wiki guidelines sort of way. The reasons I placed them have to do with the need to distinguish between governmental/organization articles and separate ethnographic and commnity articles, as per parameters/guidelines deriving from the Indigenous peoples WikiProject; the point of the blank sections was to give visitors to those pages (most likely members of the First Nations or people from their areas/towns, or other BC Wikipedians) as to what kind of content should fill out the stubs; otherwise they'll wind up tending towards ethnographic and/or political/cultural content, which would belong in other (albeit largely parallel...) articles. See the talkpage at where Sto:lo redirects to or Talk:Gitxsan and User talk:OldManRivers for an in-depth rundown on the situation, if you're interested; there are other new, and old articles, which also have the blank headings; do me a favour and leave 'em alone ;-) I'm working on getting the material to fill in the headings - it's a lot of work, and I'm not even aboriginal myself so it's hard to navigate the maze of info; right now I'm just building the catalogue of stub-articles for BC band governments ("First Nations" in the political-unit sense) and Tribal Councils (which are councils of First Nations political units). Easiest to reply on my talkpage, if you need to.Skookum1 23:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jonas Larsen

You said it didn't assert notability. Did you happen to translate it? If it happens to assert notability in Danish, Finnish or some other language it's still an assertion, just one that happens to need translation. 14 year olds can be notable. I should know. I created several articles on kids. Can you expand on your reason to nom this for speedy? - Mgm|^(talk) 13:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have expanded on the reason for speedy. It is an article about a 14 year old Norwegian boy who likes cars and girls, so not notable. - Jvhertum 13:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Walt Disney Legacy Collection

I don't think this is quite a db-spam situation, so I removed the tag rather than delete it. If you want to try PROD or AfD though, you are welcome to.--Isotope23 18:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will AfD it. - Jvhertum 08:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Snow Planet

The Snow Planet page is not spam. Please go here to learn more about Snow Planet. [1] (Be sure not to confuse snowplanet.co.nz with snowplanet.com). However, if you feel that the Snow Planet article (stub) is non-notable then please say why. --KylePIB 05:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is non-notable because the article does not assert the encyclopedic significance of Snow Patrol. An indoor snow centre is not notable just as a movie theatre is not, unless it has some special architectural or cinematic value. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate directory of businesses. Perhaps you could add that Snow Patrol is the southern hemisphere's largest indoor ski slope, IMO that would make it notable, but be sure to cite an independent source on this. Regards, Jvhertum 11:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leona Woods

Thanks for helping out! Excellent! :-) (→Netscott) 14:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I'll work on it a bit more soon. Jvhertum 15:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lieben Prize

Thank you so much for putting the necessary first line before my explanation of Lieben Prize!HPaul 15:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No prob, yr welcome! - Jvhertum 16:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is Bird Flu

Jvhertum writes: "this article is not about bird flu, and links still needs to be cleaned up. See Links and URLs for info on how to add links"

Well Sir, if Avian Influenza is not Bird Flu than we don't know what is. You may want to read the article again! Cherylbennett 13:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant was: the subject of the article is the origination GISAID, not bird flu. Therefore the transwiki links and categories you added were incorrect.

In future, could you please sign your comments by typing four tildes or clicking the signature icon along the top of the text field, so I know who I'm talking to?

Best regards, Jvhertum 08:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, the origination is about an initiative 110% related to birdflu. It is for the very reason links related bird flu (also known as avian flu, avian influenza, H5N1) are an absolut must. Do you take pleasure in forcing your view and not the view of the Wikepedia community or even its charta on others? You are not being helpful and not even constructively critical. Cherylbennett 13:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cocktail personalities

You nominated my on Cocktail personalities for deletion. While you may not find this subject important, I don't think obscure Dutch opera singers are important, but I also don't think they should be deleted. Please review the page again and read my discussion for inclusion on the delete page. If you choose to request any other articles I create, I would appreciate a note on my talk page beforehand. Thanks, Philvarner 22:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said the subject was not important. I do think it fails WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. I think the subject is too vaguely defined to warrant its own page, but f you had read my comments you would see that I also suggested that the information could be merged into an another page. This is just one guy's opinion, and you are free to express another view, but please don't get so defensive. - Jvhertum 09:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]