User talk:Amitchell125/Archive2

In case you thin I have forgotten about you...
Hi

I have been keeping an eye on your recent work and I can only say "Well Done" by giving you this -

Keep up the good work...I didn't really need to say that as I know your work is always of a high standard :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 08:23, 6 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Cheers Chaosdruid!--Amitchell125 (talk) 08:47, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Medieval Times History
Why are you spamming links to this website? It is not a reliable source, nor it has any substantial info. I will revert your edits. If you continue to add this, you might be blocked fro spamming. Thanks, Renata (talk) 22:14, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * My apologies, I didn't realise it wasn't allowed.--Amitchell125 (talk) 07:41, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Sigeberht of East Anglia
A few comments on the GA review page for you, when you get a chance. Regards, BencherliteTalk 14:36, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * OK; family reasons will limit my editing for the next few days, but I'll look at it as soon as I get a chance. BencherliteTalk 07:21, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll take a look (Eorpwald of East Anglia can wait).--Amitchell125 (talk) 07:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Or rather, simply..thanks!--Amitchell125 (talk) 18:52, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * And another GA pass is yours! Nice work. Best wishes, BencherliteTalk 20:54, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Oooh, that'd be fun! Incidentally, I left a note about Sigeberht for User:Ealdgyth, who's written many FAs in similar areas, in case she can think of further ways to improve the article.  BencherliteTalk 21:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

FA?
Congratulations on the GA for Sigeberht! Are you interested in taking it or Anna of East Anglia to FA? If so, let me know; I'd be glad to help by reviewing it ahead of time, or helping add more material, or whatever would be useful -- I've done a fair bit of work on AS kings and would like to see more of them make it to FA. I see Bencherlite mentioned the article to Ealdgyth; she's very knowledgeable in this area too. Mike Christie (talk – library) 12:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the offer to help get Anna up to FA. I've never tried to go to this level before, so I'd need some advice. Willing to have a go though!--Amitchell125 (talk) 18:56, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Great! I also saw a note that you're interested in Rædwald; I did a draft revision a few years ago, which is at User:Mike Christie/Raedwald draft -- the main author of the current version of the page didn't like it, so I left the East Anglian kings alone and worked mostly on the Mercians and Wessex kings.  If you see anything there you think is worth using, please grab it.
 * For Anna, if you'd like to have a crack at taking it to FA, I could do a review of the current article for you, indicating the things that I think would come up at FA, and then you could work on them and it would then be your FA. If you prefer, we could also collaborate on it; and conominate it at FA.  I'm happy either way.  If you'd like to see some of the A-S kings I've nominated for FA, there's a list at the bottom of my user page. Mike Christie (talk – library) 02:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I would like you to do the FA review and I then work on the article, with advice and suggestions from you. Is that OK with you?
 * Sure. I am trying to get another article ready right now, but it's most of the way there, so I should be able to take a look at Anna by the end of the weekend; if not it shouldn't be too long afterwards.  One quick comment now is that you might consider a background section of some kind -- see Wilfrid or Offa of Mercia for examples.  There is no style guide requirement that you do something like this, but readers unfamiliar with the material would benefit from an introductory section giving background, so you might consider it. More this weekend, I hope. Mike Christie (talk – library) 00:32, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'm done for now. Let me know what you think; I hope my notes are helpful. I'll watch the page so I will respond there if you have any comments or disagree with anything. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk – library) 18:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks like the free access to the ODNB was a glitch; it brings up a subscription screen now. Oh, well; you can ignore that comment, though I think if you have a UK library card you can get free access. Mike Christie (talk – library) 22:37, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:59, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rædwald of East Anglia
The article Rædwald of East Anglia you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Rædwald of East Anglia for things which need to be addressed. Eisfbnore talk 14:18, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Nice work so far, and many of the sentences look much better now. However, it seems that you pasted one of my review comments into the article here! ;) -- Eisfbnore  talk 18:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The article is now a GA. Well done! Eisfbnore  talk 13:43, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a pilot study
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 18:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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) 13:00, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Anna
I'll take a look -- I am a bit busy in real life this weekend and have made some other on-wiki promises so it may be a bit before I get to it; nudge me if I don't look at it in the next two or three weeks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Eorpwald of East Anglia/GA1
I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:33, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Anglo-Saxon England MAG.svg
Thanks for uploading File:Anglo-Saxon England MAG.svg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Anglo-Saxon England.svg
Thanks for uploading File:Anglo-Saxon England.svg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Slow on Anna
Sorry I'm a bit slow on responding on the Anna talk page; I know you've been working on those issues but it's been a busy week. I should be able to respond and strike some points this weekend at the latest. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Done
Nikkimaria has revisited; she found a couple more minor issues. I've struck all but two points. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:18, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

FA?
I noticed you created the FAC nomination for Anna but did not actually add it to the WP:FAC page; was that intentional? The final step is to add it to the FAC page itself, which makes it visible to the FAC reviewers. Let me know if you would like me to do it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I think it's done now. --Amitchell125 (talk) 04:10, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Felixitations
I have promoted the Rt. Rev. gentleman to GA. An easy task, as the prose is pleasing, the content crystal clear and the GA criteria all met handsomely. If, perchance, you are inclined to swap roles as inquisitor and victim, I have the not very saintly Bernard Levin at peer review if you care to look in, but don't feel in the least obliged if you're not interested. Tim riley (talk) 20:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That's most kind of you – and is exactly the kind of eagle-eyed detailed reviewing that is so helpful. Don't hesitate to call on me to reciprocate for any of your future articles. (Afterthought, by way of establishing some sort of East Anglian credentials – I lived in Wicklewood, near Wymondham, for 18 months in the 1970s) Tim riley (talk) 15:47, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Small world! And I'm playing my viola in Elgar's Enigma Variations on Sunday... ...too many notes in the Finale. I look forward to looking at your future music articles.--Amitchell125 (talk) 16:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Good luck with the Elgar! I always understood from a friend who played in the 2nd violins of the LSO that the work she and other string players dread for "too many notes" is the finale of Schubert's Great C major. As to future music articles, User:Brianboulton and I are currently working on Messiah, and I may come knocking at your door for comments in due course; but not yet – you still have time to flee the country. Tim riley (talk) 16:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Sutton Hoo
I've been working on Sutton Hoo a bit and cut down its size, adding a few things and generally tightening the prose style, using your review comments as a guide where they helped. Any chance of a short, sharp look at it to suggest what else should be done? --Hel-hama (talk) 20:26, 15 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I haven't read through it, but on glancing at it, it is clear it needs trimming. The suggestion on the talkpage of creating an article, Sutton Hoo treasures, and moving some content there is a good one. There are also too many images - and some very poor quality images of the site. These could be reduced. There are some very crisp, clear and useful drawn maps of the burials. These are excellent and should be retained. The Bibliography is dauntingly huge. We aim to provide a useful summary of human knowledge, not exhaustive lists of books. This is a general encyclopaedia article not a scholarly textbook for university students. The article needs to be written with the general reader in mind. It needs to be clear and concise - as pointed out in a recent study: Wikipedia Signpost/2011-07-11/In the news. We need to avoid "information overload".  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  21:06, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with all your points - many thanks for giving me the inspiration keep going! --Hel-hama (talk) 21:14, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Æthelhere of East Anglia passed
Just to ley tou know I passed this article-SCB &#39;92 (talk) 12:22, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 00:38, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Tribal Hidage
Just to let you know, I've begun (but not finished) the GA review. There are a few points on the review page, and a few questions about sourcing there. I've also done some copy-editing, but please just revert anything I've messed up. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That's no problem at all, your changes are looking really good. Let me know if you need longer than a week. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:44, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks like you are nearly done. Please ping me when you are completely finished and I will have another look. --Sarastro1 (talk) 13:41, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've done some picking at it and made a few changes. I also left some final points but I'm just about ready to pass now. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:12, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've passed it now. Thanks for your patience, the amount of work you put into this is incredible. It may be worth putting this up at FAC at some point, although I would always do PR first as more eyes are always good. If you do, it may be worth seeing if there is a general history that summarises the current thinking about the TH so you do not have to cite lots of individual works. Similarly for the historiography. Also, while I am completely happy with this as a GA, my own historical knowledge is not up to date enough to say if this reflects current thinking to FA standard; maybe consult some other medievalists, who may also be able to provide the missing Tribal Hidage article. If you do take it further, let me know and well done again. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:17, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tytila of East Anglia
The article Tytila of East Anglia you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Tytila of East Anglia for things which need to be addressed. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:33, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Monarchs list
I've been thinking about this while I worked this morning. I figure that there isn't really a way to make sure the two are aligned, because for example, a mobile phone could display it entirely differently again. Therefore, for me, it came down to a simple question: is the list better with or without it. And the answer is clearly, with it. I'll strike that concern and just leave you the minor ones below it.  Harrias  talk 13:42, 28 December 2011 (UTC)