User talk:Ealdgyth/Archive 15

Question from FAC
A question I had on the Gray Mouse Lemur FAC that may get overlooked: On the topic of the Etymology section, can Wiktionary be used as a reference somehow? I've noticed that it seems to have a lot of the Greek and Latin roots (but unfortunately no sources). If it can be used, it would offer a much cleaner (and more reliable) reference than what I'm using now. (They use it as a reference for a word on the article Wiktionary.) I know you don't usually do etymology sections, but maybe you can address it as a reference question. –  VisionHolder  «  talk  »  22:03, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not Ealdgyth, but I can answer this question; definitely not. Do you have access to the online edition of the OED? If you don't, I can get whatever you need from there. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * What Malleus said. I'm kinda swamped with a RL project... Ealdgyth - Talk 22:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Flag of Japan/archive3
I removed an entire section and it reduced the FOTW reference down to one. I honestly kept them because they provided English sources for what I linked to. With http://www.fotw.net/flags/jp-20.html I provided the image used on that page but I am surprised the main symbols page was not linked to it with the construction sheet. Anyways, only one link remains and I will try and find a way to get rid of it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:34, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I removed all of the FOTW citations. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Crusades symposium
Hi Ealdgyth, no problem, maybe next time (although the next one isn't until 2014). I was actually in Chicago briefly, but only at the airport on the way home. I was going to say maybe now I can get back to helping out with Wikipedia, but now I kind of urgently need to finish my thesis, so maybe I'll be even less helpful... Adam Bishop (talk) 19:24, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Catholic Church
Hi E. I used a quote from you in my filing statement at Arbitration/Requests/Case. Please let me know if you feel I've misrepresented your intent, or if you are otherwise uncomfortable with my using your words. I'll be happy to fix it/remove if you feel it is necessary. Sorry to drag you into this in any way, and if I'm not around a lot in the next few weeks, this would be why. ... Karanacs (talk) 20:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll see if I have the time for this... ugh. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:03, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Thomas of Bayeux part deux
I think the old fella's about as ready now as he'll ever be, so bring on the FAC. I think I've mentioned it before, but I find the lack of that extra "s" in phrases such as "elder Thomas' father" to be rather odd, but I realise it's a personal preference. I want to write it as I'd say it "elder Thomas's father", but each to their own. I recall a similar discussion on the Robert Burns page, where the consensus was for "Burns's" instead of "Burns, but it's horses for courses I suppose. Anyway, good luck at FAC. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Sandboxing
E, do you think the draft version of User:Montanabw/Sandbox2 is good enough to escape the deletionists if we take it live? A person on German wiki asked me to help put the German version up over here on en.wiki and this is basically as good a translation as we can cook up. What think you? Far from a GA candidate, but not a BLP, so will it survive? Montanabw (talk) 00:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you find another source that discusses him? that'd help a bunch. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)


 * As in one in English? I'm going to see if I can dig up Podhajsky's more autobiographical works, he will have had to have mentioned the fellow some time if Podhajsky was a student of his.  Unfortunately, I don't own them (only Complete Training of Horse and Rider) so have to hope they still live at the library.   Montanabw (talk) 02:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Sources for Thomas
I was reviewing Thomas's sources, with a view to posting a note at the FAC saying the sources were OK, and I thought I'd check in with you on your usual approach. I recognize most of what I see in your references list, but there are a couple of journals that I don't know. For Albion, for example, I clicked through to the WP article, then through to the external journal site, and I see that indeed it is a scholarly journal. This is enough for me -- without being familiar with that journal or your field I don't know if it's got a reputation as, e.g., a violently Marxist journal that is scorned in the field. Is there more you'd do to verify the sources? I think this is probably enough, but as you've done this so many times I thought I'd check. Mike Christie (talk) 00:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * In medieval history there are no "violently Marxist" sources, quite honestly. Albion went out of business, but it was merged with Journal of British Studies, so that's mostly reputable. See here Albion is indexed by JSTOR, which will give you some idea of it use also. Generally, if it has a doi, I'm much less concerned about it. (I think Albion has it.) Ealdgyth - Talk 00:41, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I didn't think there were, really. OK, sounds like there's a sniff test going on here, which I understand how to do.  I will drop a note at the FAC.  Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 02:24, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I see Ling.nut showed me that there's more to source checking than verifying the quality of the listed references! I'll remember that next time. Mike Christie (talk) 14:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Miss Meyers
I've been through Miss Meyers now. There's just one thing still bothering me, this sentence: "The AQHA also awarded her the title of Superior Race Horse in 1954, and throughout her racing career her highest speed index was AAAT." "Throughout her racing career" implies that she had the AAAT rating all her career, but it's followed by "her highest speed index", which implies that she didn't. I'm not quite certain what's meant, but would something like "... the highest speed index she achieved during her racing career was AAAT" be nearer the mark? --Malleus Fatuorum 14:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's probably correct, but before you correct it let me check the original source to make sure that changing it to that won't be too close a paraphrase. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:41, 25 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll leave it to you to make whatever change you think is best. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:42, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:44, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you too
Thank you for the FAC thanks, and thanks too for all you do checking sources. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 18:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

PS Is the waterfall panorama image above something you hate (talk page template)? If so, my apologies. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 18:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, no. I dislike the "talkback" template, the one that says "I replied on my talk page, so I'll spam your talk page with something that won't ever archive..." Ealdgyth - Talk 18:07, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought that was probably the case - thanks (and phew). Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 18:23, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks! Dincher (talk) 20:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the nice message! Thank you for all you do as well. -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  21:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Many thanks, Ealdgyth. It was a pleasure (most of the time!). :) SlimVirgin  TALK  contribs 18:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, well, if it was always a pleasure, they wouldn't call it FAC, they'd call it vacation... Ealdgyth - Talk 18:38, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks again  YellowMonkey  ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll )  00:16, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Good knight ;)
thanks for the image and message. It's nice to know someone notices. Do you feel like the good knight today? And does that imply that sometimes you feel like the bad knight? The windmill? Or Sancho? (or the horse). Auntieruth55 (talk) 22:11, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

FAR Question
Yes, another one! Just tell me to go away if I'm getting annoying with my sourcing questions! This one is with regard to the FAR of Soren Kierkegaard, found at Featured article review/Søren Kierkegaard/archive1. The main editor is challenging several of my questions about what I believe to be non-reliable sources, stating that they are tertiary references and therefore do not need to meet the same reliability guidelines as secondary sources. I've never seen this argument before, so am wondering if I missed a large piece of policy at some point in my reading. Also at question is if APA-style references (which isn't used consistently in the article anyways) needs page numbers for anything other than quotes in a FA-level article. Answers on these would be much appreciated. (A full sourcing review would also be appreciated, as I'm not fully sure of my abilities in the area, but I feel that may be a little much to ask as I know you are busy with RL and already overburdened at FAC...) Thanks in advance - I owe you chocolates! Dana boomer (talk) 01:29, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, Dana I'm really kinda swamped in RL. I got a new "project" handed to me in my contract work, plus I'm teaching some others in the game I work for, so it's been a bit wild and wooly here. I did look at the FAR, and no, just because they are tertiary doesn't excuse them from the normal reliablity concerns. Everything needs page numbers, unless it's a journal article/pamplet. It looked like you're doing pretty good with the FAR, on a quick glance. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:37, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for the answer; no problem about the full review. I knew that you had said you were busy, just mentioned it on the off chance. Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Paulinus
Hey there. Seeing you're online, I wanted to ask you a question if you don't mind. You see, the article says Because the pallium did not reach Paulinus until after he had left York, it was of no use to him. I was wondering why. He was bishop of Rochester, couldn't he have used it for that? Cheers and thanks Raystorm   (¿Sí?)  15:59, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Palliums are for archbishops, not bishops, and they are basically a symbolic vestment, saying that whoever is wearing it is an archbishop and has an archbishop's authority over other bishops under them. The history of the see of York is a bit ... confuzzled in this time. It was obviously intended to be an archbishopric, as a pallium was sent to Paulinus. However, by the time the pallium reached Paulinus, he wasn't in York anymore, and had been driven into exile. He got a "consolation prize" of Rochester, but Rochester was clearly not intended to be an archbishopric (way too close to Canterbury which was one). When bishops reappear at York, they do not receive a pallium nor are they considered archbishops until 745 (or sometime around then, it's after Wilfrid, that's for sure. I can't remember the exact date). Ealdgyth - Talk 16:09, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I see. Thank you very much. :) Raystorm   (¿Sí?)  16:12, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Travel planning...
Who knew Wikipedia would be so helpful!

For those following the saga above... the revised-revised-revised itinerary is as follows:


 * 25 May - fly out of the States
 * 26 May - arrive Heathrow, grab rental car, travel to Salisbury where we are staying for four nights.
 * 26-29 May - based out of Salisbury. Sightseeing: Salisbury Cathedral, Stonehenge, Avebury, Glastonbury Abbey, Beaulieu Abbey, Winchester Cathedral, New Forest, Rufus Stone in New Forest, scenic driving in Dorset and Cornwall, including Dartmoor National Park and Exmoor National Park.
 * 30 May - transfer from Salisbury to Canterbury. See Hastings, Brighton, Battle Abbey in route
 * 31 May - 1 June - Canterbury Cathedral, Arundel Castle, Chichester Cathedral, Fishbourne Roman Palace
 * 2 June - travel into London, surrender rental car
 * 2 -5 June - London sightseeing: Big Ben, Parliament Buildings, Buckingham Palace, St. Paul's, London Bridge, British Museum, Tower of London (must arrange to make sure mother is frisked after seeing Crown Jewels, she's got a thing for jewelry), Westminster Abbey, Victoria & Albert, National Gallery, British Library.
 * 6 June - Chunnel train to Amsterdam
 * 7 June - board ship in Amsterdam, late afternoon. The big thing I wanted to see in Amsterdam, the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, is mostly closed, so we can see what little they have out in a morning. I've never been a big Anne Frank fan, so the house doesn't mean much to me (besides, Auschwitz was probaby more sobering as a visit anyway.)

7 June through 9 July we'll be on board the MS Prinsendam (1988), cruising first the Norwegian fjords with a two night stop in London, then the Baltic, with a two night stop in St Petersburg over the Fourth of July. London will be porting on 24-26 June, so we'll do the above mentioned train trip to York and overnight in either York or Durham so I can see those two spots.

Yikes! LONG trip, but worth it. Getting mom on an overseas flight is difficult, so we tend to go for long trips when we do. My main query is, anything that we're "missing" that we "should" see? I know folks are saying that Stonehenge is a bit of a let down, but it's like the Grand Canyon, you gotta see it once. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It goes without saying that anyone in range of us who wants to arrange a meetup, email me and we can see what we can work out. SO and I are pretty serious ale drinkers, so testing new beers is a great thing to do. Last trip he and I took, we drank, err.. sampled beers across Central Europe, which was great! Ealdgyth - Talk 17:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * May bump into you in Cornwall, but I'll be out of town when your in London. Do try and catch a choral service at one of those cathedrals (though a lot of choirs may be on half-term, and have visiting choirs filling in, most cathedrals put up music schedules on their websites pretty well in advance).  British trains can be horrendously expensive if not booked in advance, http://www.eastcoast.co.uk is the company that runs the line up to York and Durham, if they're not booking to the dates you need yet, you can get them to email you as soon as they do, which is the best way of getting hold of a more sensibly priced ticket.  David Underdown (talk) 17:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Forgot to say, highly recommend the tower tour at Salisbury. You make your way up to ceiling level at the West End, walk along the top of the nave ceiling, then up the tower to the base of the spire, timed as I recall so that you arrive as the clock is about to strike the hour (or maybe we were just lucky).  Lovely views over the surrounding countryside.  You would love Old Sarum too I suspect, but the other members of your party, not so much.  David Underdown (talk) 18:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a fatal invitation! As an alternative excursion from Canterbury: Ightham Mote top moated manor-house 1320 on, Rochester Cathedral - largely Romanesque and Rochester Castle hulking ruined keep of 1120, and Leeds Castle see above, are all close together 25 miles-ish from Canterbury, or just near the M25 if coming that way from Salisbury. If going the Hastings way, Pevensey Castle - ruined small medieval castle inside Roman fort which was used by both Harold and William's armies in 1066, just near Battle Abbey. Out West, I find the tiny empty Totnes Castle the most evocative Norman motte; you can really see how it commands the town & the countryside. Btw, I expect you mean Tower Bridge next to the Tower of London not London Bridge (70s concrete).  Johnbod (talk) 19:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Let me know if you're in London for any length of time and you're more than welcome to get the guided tour of the 19th-century riverside and/or the vernacular architecture of the Moselle Valley if you want... (You might actually like the Moselle Valley; it never makes it onto the tourist itineraries but it has some extraordinary buildings and a very odd history.) – iride  scent  19:53, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * (Actually, one more thought) If you get the chance, Norwich is probably the English town you'd like best; it's nowhere near as touristy as the other old cities, but because its local industries (mustard and confectionery) were in recession throughout the industrial revolution, and it was untouched in both wars, it's survived virtually intact from mediaeval times. – iride  scent  19:57, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Are you going through NYC? (Party at Moni's house now ... )  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:01, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No, we're flying out of Minneapolis, and I think our return flights come into O'Hare. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:26, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Horse articles
I agree that the use of "Footnotes", (or simply Notes) "Citations" and "References" is perfectly acceptable. However, there is no consistency in the way these terms are used and on quite a few of the FA articles the term "Footnotes" is used in place of "Citations" (or References) and on at least two articles the notes were labelled "Notes" and the citations were labelled "Footnotes". There appears to be some misunderstanding as to when and where the terms "Notes" and/or "Footnotes" ought to be used. If "Citations" is the preferred heading for inline references, then you need to take this up with others who write about horses. My point here is specifically to eliminate the wrong usage of the term "Footnotes" for sections that do not contain anything that even vaguely resembles a footnote.

Since consistency appeared to be an issue, I changed a number of articles, simply to make them consistent. They have been changed back, and unless someone has subsequently corrected them, are no longer consistent. Can I suggest that you check out Easy Jet, Thoroughbred and Cleveland Bay? Amandajm (talk) 12:32, 6 March 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no requirement for FAs to be consistent between them. You'll find a variety of referencing and layout systems within various FAs. I prefer to avoid bibliography sections unless we are talking about a person who wrote works, in which case it's good to use that. While, yes, the "notes" aren't necessarily footnotes per se, most everyone understands what is meant. that's the determining factor, if the information is presented in a manner the reader can understand. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:14, 6 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Amandajm, if you didn't notice, Ealdgyth was creator and lead editor on Easy Jet and several of the other articles you changed, and she took them to GA and FA virtually singlehandedly. She also led the team that took THoroughbred to FA, and helped with Cleveland Bay.  I think she knows what she's doing here, and it would be good of you to respect someone with this level of accomplishment. Unless you want to amend the wiki MOS, please just leave it be.  Montanabw (talk) 03:52, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Richard I of England
Hi Ealdgyth, I was wondering if you could comment in the section linked above if you have time. I don't know if you've noticed recent changes to the article, but in short, a new editor has added a section on Richard's sexuality (sourced to the book by Jean Flori) but I'm wondering if more needs to be said on the subject. Thanks, Nev1 (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Philip the Arab and Christianity GAR
Hey, Ealdgyth. I've now taken Philip the Arab and Christianity to GAR, after an outside reviewer dropped in and left an inadequate review accompanied by a "fail". Would you be willing to drop in and comment? I'd very much appreciate it. ...I don't like seeing articles treated like this. The page is here. G.W. (Talk) 14:52, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hamiltonstone has declared himself against detail, while Jezhotwells finds the article so uniformly terrible that he cannot give examples of what is terrible. That can't be right, can it? G.W. (Talk) 04:18, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * If you'd prefer to comment in a lower-temperature zone, I've opened up a PR here. G.W. (Talk) 06:51, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

History of logic
I have added a considerable number of citations, particular to the 'general' statements that you were rightly critical of. Would you like to review again? Thanks From the other side (talk) 12:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Japanese horse sculpture
I'm fooling with the alt text of Funerary art. There's a horse sculpture. I'm lacking some vocabulary or at least descriptive terms. Couldst thou lend a bit of help? It shouldn't take more than a moment.&bull; Ling.Nut 08:51, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you! &bull; Ling.Nut 02:35, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Tithing
I don't know why, but I thought of you when I came across this. I'd never heard of it. Parrot of Doom 20:26, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:45, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Nimitz class aircraft carrier‎
I have put this article up for PR WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Nimitz class aircraft carrier‎, with the intention of putting it up for A class review or an FAC at some point. It is currently a GA. I was directed to you by Ed, and was wondering if you could have a look at the article at some point. Thanks. Jhbuk (talk) 21:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Question on a source...
Hi Ealdgyth...long time no talk :) I've been working on the Appaloosa article on and off, and am considering working it up to FAC status as my next project. There are several links to this site, which although a great references that cites its sources, is maybe not reliable as it is run by a not-well-known animal sanctuary? My question would be - would this site be better, and good enough for FAC? It seems to be put together by a team of scientists from several universities and other institutions. My other option would be to go directly to the sources cited by both of these sites, although that will take a bit more effort so I'm hoping one of the above will suffice! Dana boomer (talk) 21:42, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd want to see what the scientists on the second site actually produce, but if they are pretty well regarded in the field, then citing that site might work. Since I've done so much work on Appaloosa, I wouldn't be able to comment at FAC on it. (I think at one point I was one of hte leading contributors to it)... It's lovely here... I even got to ride my QH mare this afternoon! Ealdgyth - Talk 22:00, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Rebecca Bellone, listed as the "chief molecular biology researcher" seems to have a long list of publications, see worldcat here. I can't find anything for the other main person listed, Sheila Archer, but she seems to be more on the visual, physical end and less on the scientific end. The three UoK peoples' names can be clicked on for a link to their webpages, which each have a CV listed that include publications, which are extensive for all three; same for the Texas A&M guy and the lady from Cornell. I didn't dig any deeper on the others, but can if you would like publication lists for everyone on the page. Does this work? It's gorgeous here too and I'm loving being able to work outdoors in comfort; it's scheduled to turn back to winter next week though so I'm enjoying it while I can! Dana boomer (talk) 23:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * As a secondary question, would you be able to take a run through the article and see if there are any sources that need to be replaced? If you don't have time for it now (I know you've been busy with RL stuff lately) that's fine, but just thought I'd ask! In particular, I'm a bit worried that the article might depend too much on information from the Appaloosa Horse Club and related organizations/publications (Appaloosa Museum, Appaloosa Journal, the stud books, etc). I know that you can't be a reviewer at FAC, but a thorough scan ahead of time will possibly save us much grief when we get there :) Thanks in advance for your comments on all of the above. Dana boomer (talk) 19:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll try tomorrow morning. Stepdaughter's been here, she heads out tomorrow, so things should be a bit ... easier. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * That Appaloosa Project site has really expanded since the last time I visited it, a couple years ago! Wow!  Neat!  As to the other, I kind of know the people at blindappaloosas, I can email them if we need sources, they have them in hardcopy (purchased and paid) and can get me the details.  I do think that where we can find the original peer-reviewed literature, it's ideal. On the other hand, the issue is so critically important I wouldn't want to make the perfect into the enemy of the good and see the material deleted for lack of the perfect source.  Ditto for needing Ealdgyth's pre FAC eye.  If you bless it and help us defend it, E, Dana will probably get it to pull through.  Also, FWIW, if you need better sources for the history section, which has a lot of my stuff I think, I DO have an abridged copy of the Lewis and Clark Journals, a fair bit of Native American studies material plus access to the entire library of the Montana Historical Society for all kinds of good stuff on the Chief Joseph period too... let me know.  And I haven't forgotten about the pagination thing...  Montanabw (talk) 03:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It would probably not be bad to double cite the stuff in the history section cited to the App Museum or the App Club to something else. Otherwise, a quick look didn't show that much glaringly wrong. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Cool. Montana, do you think you could do some work on that part, since you said you have the sources? Ealdgyth, just to clarify, does the App Project website meet the standards due to the publications by its main scientists? FYI to everyone, I'm not going to remove any information from that section, I would just like to get some better sources for the first paragraph of the blindness section, especially since one of the sources is deadlinked. Dana boomer (talk) 21:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Not sure if there IS a need, just if there is, I've got the stuff...anything of concern?  Montanabw (talk) 23:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, should have clarified. Above, Ealdgyth said that History section stuff cited to the App History Museum/ApHC could stand to be double cited to something else. Also, in most other breed articles we try to not use the breed registry much for the "uses" section, as this tends to be where registries get fairly POV, each saying that their breed is a star at everything. So in these two areas, would your books have anything? I have a couple more general breed books coming soon that might be able to back up some of the ApHC/AHM cites, but the more specialized material you said you have would probably be better at FAC. I'm mainly concerned that reviewers might (justifiably) have a problem with so much of the article being referenced to an organization that exists to promote the breed (among other things I know, but this is a major factor). Dana boomer (talk) 00:00, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do. I've got a few issues with finding backups for things a registry WILL be the expert on (such as its own organizational history, statistice, etc...) and hope we aren't digging up sources for already-verified material (or material we aren't apt to find other sources to verify) for the sake of dealing with some literal-minded nimrod reviewer, but I DO agree that the excessively promotional tone is something to watch out for, and I can tell you from doing some work on a breed registry IRL right now, trying to keep the info real in the face of politics that don't like real is, well, extremely frustrating!  (sigh)  I know I'm being whiny, I actually agree with you on the basic point.  I just dread the FA gauntlet. Dread, dread, dread...  Montanabw (talk) 07:03, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

(undent) It's not so much the registry history that needs to be double-cited as the earlier stuff. If we can't find another source to verify, that's fine, but right now the article is really heavy on ApHC and related organization references. It's even more heavily cited to these than other breeds I've taken to FAC, and this is a breed that a lot more books and journal articles have been written about. I'm not saying we need to take all of them out, or even most of them, but cutting out even a few of the ApHC/ApHC publications/AHM refs would make me much more comfortable about going to FAC. FAC isn't a big deal, as long as the article is well-prepared ahead of time, which is what we're trying to do here. Dana boomer (talk) 21:16, 21 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Makes sense. The ApHC site is actually pretty decent compared to a lot of the others.  (except for their state of denial about ERU).  By the way, Countercanter's massive and excellent  on leopard complex should be reviewed and properly dovetailed with the Appy article. May be able to steal sources from over there quite easily.   Montanabw (talk) 03:45, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

New issue: I don't own the Freddie Harris book. I thought I might, but my "Horses in the West" book is a totally different title and author. And has virtually nothing about Appies. Given the material on bloodlines it cites, I am guessing this is something in Ealdgyth's collection. Or else it was a drive-by from one of the Appy editors who seldom visits (but may respond to an email??) But I just combed my bookshelf, and I don't have it. Montanabw (talk) 04:37, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Another question
Hi Ealdgyth, I was wondering if the Web Gallery of Art qualifies as RS. Specifically, I'd like to cite this page. Ta. Ceoil 11:15, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Their texts are normally copied without acknowlegement from very reputable art history books of a few decades ago! So accurate but dubious. For that one, I'd try the Getty website. Johnbod (talk) 13:40, 22 March 2010 (UTC)


 * If they are doing copyright violations, we can't link to them at all, much less use them as a RS. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:44, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks guys. Ceoil (talk) 21:06, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Ello Ello
I hope you haven't missed me too much. I'm trying to get back into the swing of things slowly, but there's still plenty of busyness. Just pop any source reviews you need done like before and I'll squeeze them in, probably at weekends. RB88 (T) 20:10, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thomas Becket
Hi Ealdgyth, I'm sure you know the answer to this - what should I read if I want to know about Thomas Becket's murder? England is the opposite side of my medieval world so I'm never quite sure what to read. I am especially interested in the historiographical timeline (who wrote about it, and when), and when exactly the murderers were sent to Jerusalem (and if they actually went). Wikipedia's article has a list of books but I don't know what is strictly academical and what is popular/genealogical/etc. I know that's a little strangely specific, so anything good about Thomas in general would also work. If anyone else knows anything, hopefully you can point me to them, or they will see this question here. Thanks! Adam Bishop (talk) 06:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The starting point would be Barlow's biography of Becket. James Alexander wrote an article in May 1970 in The Journal of British Studies (vol. 9 no. 2) "The Becket Controversy in Recent Historiography" pp. 1-26. J. C. Robertson and J. B. Sheppard, eds., Materials for the history of Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, 7 vols., Rolls Series, 67 (1875–85) is generally the quintisential collection of original sources. not directly related to the subject you're inquiring about, but still somewhat related A. J. Forey "The Military Order of St Thomas of Acre" English Historical Review Vol. 92, No. 364, (Jul., 1977), pp. 481-503. Hans Eberhard Mayer "Henry II of England and the Holy Land" English Historical Review Vol. 97, No. 385, (Oct., 1982) pp. 721-739 may have stuff of interest also. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks! Adam Bishop (talk) 14:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Apologies
I'm sorry Ealdgyth, I overstated my case in referring to your prose as "tortured". The "literary device" I was employing goes by the technical name of "talking bollocks". --Malleus Fatuorum 01:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't really speak for Ealdgyth, but if brilliant prose were beautiful singing, sometimes mine comes out like a rake across a chalkboard. I wasn't serious in jabbing at you Mal. I know what you were trying to say. --Moni3 (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL.. Malleus, I didn't get offended at all. My prose CAN be tortured at times, why do you think I beg someone, anyone, to help with it? It's not "horrid" by any means, but it can be more tortured than an FAC should be. And, even if it wasn't, copyediting is something ALL prose should have done, and the best copyediting is done by others, not the writer. You're going to have to work a LOT harder than that to offend me. Changing the subject, we're starting the "in depth" planning on our trip to England in May, and what do my TPSs think of Warwick Castle? We want to take mother to see something besides just the boring castle-cathedral-ruins that I'd thrive on, and she's never been to a Renaissance fair here in the states (We go often). Is it terribly cheesy? We're definitely planning the usual - Tower of London, Stonehenge, British Museum, etc. etc. plus things you'd expect from me - the Rufus Stone, Hastings, Salisbury Cathedral, etc. We do plan on taking her to Blenheim and Avebury and Brighton and Hever Castle for the maze, but other suggestions are welcome. Four nights in the heart of London, then four out in Oxford and four in Canterbury before hopping the Chunnel and going to catch our ship in Amsterdam. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:01, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I find it much harder to get the prose right in something I've written myself than I do to be critical of the prose of others, and I'd guess we all do. When you're writing you're trying to get the structure and narrative organised as best you can to fit the available sources; difficult enough in itself without having some insensitive clot coming along and telling you that the whole thing is crap because you've got too many commas, or have used the word "however" too often. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I've never been to Warwick Castle, so I can't comment on that, but I will say that Stonehenge is a great disappointment. Avebury is far better IMO, and not far away. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I suspect Stonehenge'll be a lot like when we went to the Grand Canyon, except that it was the first week of January, it was a big ditch. Nice fluffy snow all over making it pretty, but .. a deserty ditch. I was much more impressed with Black Canyon of the Gunnison or the set of Upper Falls of the Yellowstone and the Lower Falls there in Yellowstone Park. But, you're expected to see Stonehenge once in your life, if you can get by it. Same deal with Big Ben and Parliament. I'm much more excited to see the stuff in the British Library. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The Black Canyon reminds me of the Valley of the Kings strangely; not the colour, obviously. but the general topography. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:27, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * What you don't get is how high up it is and thus how... chilly it is. Especially in winter. It's one that you kinda have to see to believe, sheer granite cut down a LONG way. And narrow.... Ealdgyth - Talk 02:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey E, email Gwinva, she may have some good tourist tips for the UK, she's got the view of both sides, former resident AND tourist! (and historian!) Montanabw (talk) 18:57, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Leeds Castle in Kent is sadly inauthentic inside -- a 1920s reconstruction -- but the grounds are about the most beautiful of any castle in the UK. Other things in range of Hever Castle include Darwin's house at Downe which I haven't visited in over thirty years but which may be worth it; and on a completely different level, the Pooh sticks bridge in Ashdown forest, if you were ever a Winnie-the-pooh fan.  The "enchanted place" is near there too.  In London, if you're going to the Tower, you should definitely go to Tower Bridge -- you can go up one of the towers and walk across the crosspiece at the top.  Great view straight up the river.  I also thought the Millennium Wheel was worth the money; it's just flashy tourism, but it's very cool to see London like that.  I don't know how far out west you're going, or how much into books your mother is, but Hay-on-Wye used to be very much worth a visit when I lived near it -- home to the largest collection of second-hand book stores anywhere in the world.  It could be done as a day trip from Oxford but it's close to three hours driving.  There's a terrific pub there called the Old Black Lion that used to be a 14th century coaching inn -- great old-fashioned bedrooms, and very good beer (last time I was there, in about 2003).  The bookstores there really have to be seen to be believed. Mike Christie (talk) 01:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll second Hay-on-Wye; it's a Mecca for any book lover. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * We'll have a car, and one day trip from Oxford is to go to York and Durham (I can NOT be in England and not see either York Minster and Durham Cathedral.) General plan is to do Warwick, Blenheim, and Kenilworth one day from Oxford, another day on the York-Durham trek (which may leave mom and my son in Oxford to poke around at their leisure) and Salisbury, New Forest (Rufus Stone!), Winchester Cathedral (where Rufus is buried) and Avebury another day. That leaves some time for another trip. I'll pass on going up Tower Bridge or the Wheel, I'm deathly afraid of that sort of height. I plan to hit the street in London that has the bookstores on it, if I can. I've heard of Hay-on-Wye, it inspired Larry McMurtry to try to turn his hometown (Archer City, Texas) into something like it. I'm pretty sure Hay-on-Wye isn't in quite the desolate bit of nowhere that Archer City is (Yes, I've been there, and it's a pretty spiffy set of stores... pricey though) Ealdgyth - Talk 02:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * York and Durham from Oxford is not what we call a day trip in the UK I think. If you are planning to see stuff, other than the tiny display, at the British Library you need to have it arranged well in advance - they tend not to be very receptive (huge contast to the British Museum prints & drawings, where you just show a passport & they whip out their Raphaels).  Hay on Wye, though charming, is probably not much use when you have to lug everything home as excess baggage & everything costs twice as much as US online dealers anyway.  Broughton Castle is near Oxford & a castle turned stately home but still very pretty & interesting; likewise Lacock Abbey - ex-nunnery, not quite so near. Iffley Church, now within Oxford, is one of the best small Norman churches left.  Personally I find the smaller places often more rewarding.  Your plans at present will have you spending a lot of time in the car!  Let me know if you need more cold water. I should do a misery-guts guide.  Johnbod (talk) 02:47, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * All your "day trip" ideas have to be born in mind that to get to decent shopping I have to drive an hour each way. Bigger city is either 3 or 3 and a half hours each way. Best used bookstore concentration near me is either Indianapolis (4 hours each way) or Madison, Wisconsin (5 hours each way). Day trip to ME is at least six hours of driving. We dont' think much of going to Yellowstone, which is a two and a half DAY trip each way. I used to live in Texas, where "let's go to Dallas" (4+ hours) isn't unusual. American's love their cars. To be fair, we're not planning on taking mother with us to York/Durham. We'll probably do something like this each day we're there - SO and I wake up, drive off to photo sunrise/early hours at something small and scenic while teenaged son and mother snore. Come back, wake them up, do breaky, go hit the "must sees" for mother, then back for supper and sleep. Mother finds watching us photograph to be worse than watching paint dry, so the cute little churches, etc, will be done while she sleeps. We'll be there almost two weeks, which will help some. As for the BL, I really only wanna see the "big stuff", pop in, pop out. If I ever want to do real research, it'll be without mother in tow. (She finds library research WORSE than watching us photograph. She once accompanied me to Amarillo to the American Quarter Horse Association archives. She spent a lovely week in the hotel room while I spent it buried in the archives. After the first day at the archives, watching me pore over yellowing papers and drool over them, she said she found watching the TV in the hotel room more exciting. She insisted on coming with me though, I tried to tell her... she listens now. I had to promise that THIS trip would not involve archives...) Ealdgyth - Talk 03:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, ok. This is a good route planner site, which gives 9hrs driving for Oxford to York & Durham & back, not allowing finding somewhere to park, which in all 3 places is similar to Manhattan. Johnbod (talk) 04:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Having been neglecting my talk page stalking recently, I'll belatedly join the chorus here. Remember that British motoways are often hugely congested, and the driving experience is very stressful.  I drive London to York fairly frequently, having relatives up there, splitting the driving between two.  When we do it, we leave at 6am to get out of London before it grinds to a halt, and with a stop for some breakfast en route are usually in York (well just outside) by about 10:30.  By which time I don't really fell like doing anythig else for the rest of the day.  There are major roadworks going on on the M1 which is the amin route north which will slow you down, and as you're going past Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield and Leeds, huge amounts of local traffic join the motorway to make driving more exciting, the route planner John's linked too will probably tell to jsut keep going up the M1 and then take the A64 to York, we normally find it works better to take the M18 and A1(M), and then the A64, which avoids the worst of the Sheffield and Leeds traffic.  There are at least good park and ride facilities at York, don't try and park in the centre, put your car in one of the car parks on the edge, and take the regular buses in.  Durham is another hour and a half plus on from York.  You can of course take quieter back ways, but they'll take longer, but you could get at least a passing view of Lincoln Cathedral as well (plus assorted RAF stations as you drive through Lincolnshire).  Basically in day you won't have time to do either York or Durham justice.  David Underdown (talk) 17:04, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * We'll take that advice. We'll be going from Oxford, not London, we're not even thinking of driving in London. Don't forget that we used to live in Houston, so traffic isn't exactly a stranger to us. (The only place in the states with worse traffic is LA or NYC. Chicago isn't nearly as bad as Houston... rush hour there is 6am to 10am and 3pm to 7pm). I know I won't be able to do York or Durham justice, but I'm not sure when I'll be able to get back, and both cathedrals are on my "must see" list. We do have 10 days, so it's not that bad. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:23, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Oxford traffic ain't that great either (I gather, haven't been there much), timewise the journey is probably about the same. Bear in mind that for most intents you're going to be driving in that sort of traffic for the whole four hour journey, sometimes travelling at 70 mph, other times slowing to a crawl (for no apparent reason). David Underdown (talk) 17:47, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * On a last note of misery, I'd read very carefully indeed what any hotels in historic city centres say about parking, and ask questions if not entirely clear. Johnbod (talk) 17:58, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * A couple of alternative means to the desired end occurred to me last night. If you drove from Oxford to York, then it's only three-quarters of an hour by train to Durham (though admittedly neither station is particularly well-situated for their respective cathedrals) - the view as you enter Durham is much more spectacular by train than from the road too.  Or, do the whole journey by train from London, it's under two hours from King's Cross to York, and you get a bonus view of Peterborough Cathedral along the way.  I know you've promised no archives, but if your mother would bein any way interested by Kew Gardens (the blubell wood should be in full flwoer abou the time you'll be here), when you get the tube station, you could head off smartly in the other direction, and provided you've completed the registration formalities and placed your order before hand, within an hour you could be unrolling a genuine pipe roll or similar.  Domesday is also on public display in the museum of The National Archives....  David Underdown (talk) 09:27, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes I wondered about rail - this is the planner site. Kew is a cunning idea too. Johnbod (talk) 11:57, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

(outdent) Well, Durham and York just went out of the picture, we had to make a small change in itinerary and discovered that Oxford is booked up for the days we would have stayed there now, so going to plan C (X is more like it, but hey, that's what travel is all about!) and going to arrive Heathrow, rent car, stay four nights in Salisbury, go to Canterbury, four nights there, and then turn in rental car and do three nights in London before hopping on the Chunnel to Amsterdam. With the change in place from Oxford to Salisbury, we'll be doing a day trip out Cornwall way instead of York. Guess I'll just have to come back some other time! (One other option is to go to York when we hit London again with our cruise, we stop there for two nights, so we might make it then while Mom stays on the ship -- by taking the train from London.) Ealdgyth - Talk 15:31, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Out of interest, what's the "best used bookstore" in Indianapolis you're thinking of? Admittedly it's 10 years since I lived there, but in my time the only used bookstore I was aware of was a tiny storefront next to a Taco Bell near IUPUI, filled with dog-eared creationist tracts and Jackie Collins novels. (I second Malleus about Stonehenge, FWIW. I've never known anyone whose reaction wasn't "is that it?".) – iride  scent  17:12, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Half-Price books has invaded Indy, so it's a good way to pick up cheap sci-fi and other paperbacks. For scholarly stuff, I head to Madison, where U of W supports a fair supply of decent scholarly bookstores. But if I really just want a particular title, I go online .. Amazon's actually got a pretty decent selection of used stuff available through their Amazon sellers program. I'm expecting Stonehenge to be like the Grand Canyon was ... "Been there, seen it, now can I go?" But... it's so close to Avebury and Salisbury that it's criminal to not at least cross it off my list. Big Ben's the same way to me, honestly, as is Buckingham. If it was just me and my SO, we'd be doing Wales and Scotland and staying a month and only doing about three days in London, enough to see the Brit Mus and Tower and then skedaddling. (St. Paul's won't do a thing for me, way too late ...) Ealdgyth - Talk 17:23, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The best way I know to find a title at the lowest price is used.addall.com; they're an aggregator and include Amazon, Half.com, Biblio, TomFolio, Alibris, and all the rest. I used to use bookfinder.com but I think addall has a slightly greater reach. Mike Christie (talk) 13:05, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Ealdgyth, I would strongly advise you to see Hever Castle as well as Hever Church. Another place you should definitely visit is Arundel Castle in West Sussex. It's fabulous. I used to live in the East Sussex town of Lewes. Now, I think you'd enjoy that as it has Tudor houses (including Anne of Cleves house-although she never lived there) as well as the medieval Barbican. It is a town with a lot of history so IMO is a must-see. You mentioned York; I agree with that choice, but while you're in Yorkshire, why not visit the ruins of Middleham Castle, the former residence of Richard III? These are just a few suggestions as I accidentally happened onto your talk page. Cheers and I hope you have a lovely holiday.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 09:05, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive
–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Royal National College for the Blind FAC
Hi Ealdgyth. Thanks for taking a look at the article. Have replied on the article's FAC page. Cheers Paul Largo (talk) 20:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao
I appreciate the comments you left last time, and I've made changes to the article based on them. So far, nobody's come by to support or oppose the article, so do you think you could stop back by and do that, or suggest more changes if you think they are necessary? Thanks. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 06:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello again. People are beginning to make their Support / Oppose decisions now at Featured article candidates/St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao/archive1, and I think the article is relatively complete, so I'd like to invite you to give it (another) look and weigh in one way or the other. Thanks! ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 10:25, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Rommelspargel/GA1
I fixed the couple outstanding issues, hopefully this review can be finalized now. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 18:14, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Mercia
Hope this doesn't count as a talkpage template. Metabaronic (talk) 21:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


 * LOL.. no, its the "talkback" templates I hate. Anything Wiki related needs to wait until after the summer for me, we're traveling a good bit this summer. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:48, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Exchequer of Pleas
This recent article might interest you. Any chance you know of how to expand it? GA is easy with this, but I think that after Court of Chancery FA should be possible. Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 18:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey, who are you calling easy? I know what you mean though. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 18:53, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Other than a bit more about the actual Excheuquer - and mentioning the Dialogue Concerning the Exchequer - not much I can contribute. I really don't do the later Plantagenets... much less the Tudors. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:07, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ooh, bugger. Ahh well! I might be writing an article on Attainder/corruption of the blood in a bit, which would be fun (particularly for the hook ...that corrupted blood was found approximately seven hundred years before World of Warcraft?) Ironholds (talk) 19:13, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your corrections and copyedits with the article. Oh, and if "Europe" includes "London", I'm pretty sure I owe you a pint or two; give me a poke if you're in town around the time of a meetup. Ironholds (talk) 08:09, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Request your thoughts
Hi Ealdgyth,

I'd like to see your thoughts on the article Jagdgeschwader 11. This article is currently undergoing review for GA. Since you had provided quality feedback on the A Class Review of its parent, Jagdgeschwader 1, I wish to know what you think if this article were to go for A class review later on. Thanks in advance for the time invested. '  Perseus 71  talk 00:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

When you're back…
When you're back (if you're not trapped under the Great Icelandic Dust Cloud), would you mind having a quick skim over St. Mary's Church, Chesham, in particular the early-history parts? The assorted Eadwigs, Ediths and Edwards blur together in my head, and it's entirely possible there's some glaringly obvious errors there. (You should like this one. Lots of Saxons and bishops.) – iride  scent  20:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * We don't leave for Europe for over a month... we're in Texas next week, however. I didn't see anything else that jumped out at me, though. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:16, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Texas, Europe, all the same thing… Thanks for having a look; there's still something that doesn't seem quite right to me about this one, but I can't put my finger on why. Aside from the fact that it's deathly dull, of course, but this is a topic it's impossible to make interesting. – iride  scent  21:20, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Here's my word
I am Nunez99, an account I set up so that I could (at least occasionally) have a quiet life without all of the civility warriors harrasing me. I deliberately made that posting using the Nunez99 name because I don't want to be tempted to use it again. I do now accept that wikipedia isn't for me, as has repeatedly been made very clear to me. So long, and thanks for all the fish. Malleus Fatuorum 19:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Darn it! Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 19:06, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Malleus, you disrespect the memory of Douglas Admas - the point of the ....all the fish quote was the the dolphins had received all the benefit for nothing and then just mosied on off. Clearly you efforts on WP and the thanks you got are exactly the other way round.... Pedro : Chat  19:28, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Sourcing
As the Queen of the Reliable Source, can I get your opinion on the book being discussed here? The issue is, does a self-published book by someone who's demonstrably a "genuine" historian violate WP:SPS? To me, the prime thrust of WP:SPS ("if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so") doesn't apply here—there's a strong tradition in Britain (and the US to a lesser extent) of self-publishing in specialist areas in which most books are sold by mail order or through specialist bookshops rather than through mainstream bookstores. However, I can also see the arguments against (self-published works are less likely to be fact-checked, etc). – iride  scent  11:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * As someone who has self-published in the past (and plans to in the future) there are just some markets where you almost have to. The thing to do would be to check the specialist magazines for reviews, the better self-publishers get reviews in those, which satisfy SPS in my mind. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

A little advice please
I've been wasting my time recently on this, which was featured on an episode of the television programme Arthur C. Clarke's World of Strange Powers. The episode is available on youtube (here's the relevant bit), but I'm not sure about copyright or how to cite this. Any ideas? Malleus Fatuorum 01:21, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry to stick my oar in. This would be easier if there were a DVD release you could reference instead, but failing that I think it's best to just cite the episode without the youtube link, for example:"'Fairies, Phantoms and Fantastic Photographs'. [Television production]. Arthur C. Clarke's World of Strange Powers. Episode 7. Presenters: Arthur C. Clarke (introduction), Anna Ford (narration). Yorkshire Television. ITV. May 25, 1985. Event occurs at nn:nn"That's just something cobbled together in a minute; I'm sure you'd find a better way of formatting it. Still, as with other hard-to-find sources (old newspaper and journal articles, etc) if someone wants to verify a fact, they'll have to work out how to find it themselves (or just ask). It shouldn't be hard in this case; the youtube link is one of the top results for "Fairies, Phantoms and Fantastic Photographs", and this way we at least avoid linking to a potential copyright violation. Depending on how much of the episode you intend to cite, for ease of verification you could also shove the reference information in the bibliography and use the harvnb template with the  template for multiple uses, as I've done at American Beauty (film) (the "Mendes & Ball 2000" links), or without the template, as at The Revolution Will Not Be Televised (film) ("Bartley & Ó Briain 2003")  Steve  T • C 08:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Steve, that's very useful. Malleus Fatuorum 12:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * If it were down to me, I'd use the format of cite episode, even if you don't use the actual template; that's how people will expect to see a citation formatted in this case. Thanks to the ever-growing list of Simpsons FA's, the protocols for episode-citing have had quite a bit of discussion. – iride  scent  14:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Good idea, thanks. Malleus Fatuorum 15:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Cast your vote on editing guideline at WikiProject Thoroughbred racing
There is currently an issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Thoroughbred racing that as a member you might wish to read and vote on. Handicapper (talk) 19:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao back up
Hi, I just wanted to let you know that St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao is back up as a FAC. It has had quite a bit of work since the last nomination. I'd appreciate any feedback you have at Featured_article_candidates/St._Michael's_Cathedral,_Qingdao/archive2. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 00:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Catholic Church
I came to thank you for your comments at the Catholic Church, and peeked at your talk page - we share the same (first) name - that's a surprise! Anyway, thanks for the feedback. I jumped into working/helping? on the Catholic Church, obviously without the necessary background, when the article was stalled and full of acrimony (at that time the lack of background seemed a good thing - no baggage to carry around). It's much better now, and nice to see people coming back to the page. I won't have much time for it in the next few weeks (daughter returning from college tomorrow) so I wanted to clear out what I had and get feedback, which is good. In the meantime, I'll carry on with the Reformation, but honestly, I feel that you would be much much better at this than I am, if you care to jump in. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I echo this wholeheartedly. Maybe when you come back from your nice long break you'll have the energy to help out?  There's so much work to be done, and I think you have access to a lot more sources than I do (plus you already have a pretty good idea which ones are good). Karanacs (talk) 20:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * We leave for Europe in a week and a half. We just gelded our colt, which means twice a day 20 minute bouts of making him exercise, plus all the usual "get ready to be gone for a long while" stuff. Hopefully end of August - my summer is really busy. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:41, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Celtic Christianity
Hey Ealdgyth, if you have the time and inclination, might I ask a favor? I pulled over a cite to Barbara Yorke's The Conversion of Britain from the (outstanding) Gregorian mission article to Celtic Christianity here. I wasn't going in there totally blind, I also cited John Edward Lloyd's A History of Wales which has what appears to be essentially the same interpretation. If you have a chance, could you double check for me that it's correct, and if necessary, fix it? Thanks a lot.--Cúchullain t/ c 14:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The only problem here is that Yorke gives a date of 604 for the Battle of Chester. The quote that's relevant is: "In his account of the aftermath of the St Augustine's Oak meeting, Bede has Augustine prophesy that if the British clergy would not preach Chrstianity to the English, they would suffer vengeance at their hands - and saw the prophecy as being fulfilled in 604 when, reputedly, 1200 monks from the monastery of Bangor-on-Dee were slain by Aethelfrith of Northumbria at the Battle of Chester. Aethelfrith was not a Christian and the monks who had come to pray for the army were no doubt seen by him as a legitimate target, but atrocities of this type (no doubt comitted by both sides) must have left deep-rooted scars. Evangelisation depends not only on the willingness on one side to preach, but also on receptivity from the other party." and then she goes on to discuss how the AS's would have seen the Britons as inferiors and thus would have been less likely to listen to them. I'm willing to bet that the 604 date there is an error as in Yorke's Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England she dates the Battle of Chester in 616. (pp. 83-84). Ealdgyth - Talk 15:36, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks a lot, Ealdgyth. As to the date of the battle, it was added by someone else. I don't think it's a matter of error so much as a conflict in the sources; the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and the Irish annals all have different dates for it. I moved the reference to the date into a footnote, since my edition of Bede it says he's not clear on that point. Thanks again,--Cúchullain t/ c 17:16, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * A good reminder that the article for the Battle of Chester also needs some work - well, as do a host of other articles on battles and what not. For laughs, will you have a look at that pic (a photo of a museum cabinet exhibiting the photo of a slightly damaged skull). Cavila (talk) 19:36, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Gilbert de Lacy
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Gilbert de Lacy, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.renderplus.com/hartgen/charts/de%20Lacy_0.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:12, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I say we block you now, vandal. – iride  scent  18:15, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * (ec) Wow. that's quite ... amazing. It thinks this resembles this. Yikes! Ealdgyth - Talk 18:16, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm still trying to see where the "substantial copy" part comes from... I used the same name???? Ealdgyth - Talk 18:18, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You're in good company (though in my case it was an extremely fast mirror). I can't see any similarity either, though. I guess since the other page has so little text, any similarity must be substantial. Ucucha 18:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't you be packing, instead of throwing out 5 dyks per day? Enjoy the trip! Johnbod (talk) 02:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, yeah. I'm just waiting on the delivery of the iPad I splurged on before the trip... besides, I can pretty much pack in my sleep any more... sometimes it seems I spend half my life on the road... Ealdgyth - Talk 12:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Good lord, you're really on fire today! If a certain medieval bishop can churn out prose while spending much of his time in the saddle, there's no reason why you can't deliver Gesta pontificum Anglorum as if it's the easiest thing in the world. Anyway, thanks for your work again (and great to have another primary source to link to). Cavila (talk) 17:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Becket controversy
Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Gilbert de Lacy
The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Ralph Foliot
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Reginald of Canterbury
Bradjamesbrown (talk) 06:03, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Hugh Bardulf
The DYK project (nominate) 00:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Adam of Eynsham
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for William of Wrotham
The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Legatine council
The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Frithegod
The DYK project (nominate) 06:04, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Doris Mary Stenton
The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Richard Herriard
The DYK project (nominate) 18:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Bede
Sorry for the false typo correction on this article. I've made almost 10,000 typo corrections in the last month and the error on Bede is one of only three errors that I know of. Doesn't excuse the error and I apologise for making it. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 12:56, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Gesta pontificum Anglorum
Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 18:02, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Update
Having conquered English roundabouts, as well as figuring out English maps... we are now on the final leg of this part of the England trip... London. Safely arrived in London (even drove in from Canterbury). Now for three days of pure tourism - Big Ben, Buckingham, Tower, etc. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * We await the photo uploads! (Get a photo of a police horse with a banged tail, can you??)   Montanabw (talk) 18:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ooohh, and some nice shots of a Cleveland Bay if you happen to see any wandering around the countryside :) (Yes, I know this request is a bit out there...). Hope you're having a ton of fun - it would be so cool to see the cathedral you have pictured on your userpage. Dana boomer (talk) 18:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If you should be so fortunate, also a Windsor Grey. Montanabw (talk) 22:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Uh, huh. I'll try. I did get some pics of bits and saddle bits from the Tower of London yesterday. Today is the British Museum, so maybe more stuff there... And Dana, I saw Winchester and it was amazing. Canterbury was pretty spiffy too. I have tons of pics from the various cathedrals (Salisbury, Winchester, Chichester, Canterbury) for use in pics... plus pics from St Augustine's abbey for the early Archbishops of Canterbury! Ealdgyth - Talk 07:38, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm so jealous! Have lots of fun :) Karanacs (talk) 13:49, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Update - Just returned from a day at the British Museum. Tomorrow's the last full day in London, I think it's the Tate and National Gallery ... I'm a big William Blake fan so the Tate for their Blake works. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:08, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm in awe of your energy. If I was going to spend a day in any museum in London it would unquestionably be the Science Museum; I can wander around there for hours. If you're still in London at tea-time tomorrow (4 o'clock for those unfortunate enough not to have been born English) I'd thoroughly recommend a cream tea at Simpson's of Piccadilly, to wind down. Followed by 15 pints of lager in the nearest pub, of course. :lol:
 * I want to know he we "unfortunates" can get tea-time here. Why should the Brits be the only ones who get to feast on scones and biscuits in mid-afternoon?  But I draw the line at actually drinking tea - I just want the pastries. Karanacs (talk) 18:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Tea! I'm so estatic to be in a country that LIKES tea that I can hardly speak. I get REAL tea for breakfast, and the hotel rooms have TEAPOTS, not those awful evil coffee things. This is a civilized country! Ealdgyth - Talk 18:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Have you ever heard this? Malleus Fatuorum 18:39, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Invite to project
We could really use some more experienced faces around. Sadads (talk) 21:07, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * when I get home from holiday - mid-July. Currently, I'm floating around in the North Sea... then later we go float around the Baltic! Ealdgyth - Talk 09:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Hoxne Challenge
Hi Ealdgyth, Awadewit suggested you might be interested in a project we're running here at the British Museum over the next week - The Hoxne Challenge. Perhaps you'd be able to help out and sign up? Witty Lama 14:32, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * LOL... literally, I'm floating in the North Sea. Ironically, I took shots of the Hoard while I was at the BM in late May and planned to work on it a bit, but I'm going to be unable to take part in the Challenge as ... I'm going to be still on holiday. Maybe next time? Ealdgyth - Talk 09:01, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ha! well - congratulations on finding internet in the north sea :-) If you get a chance (not sure if that is likely) could you upload those photos to Commons? We're having difficulty getting good shots. Witty Lama 12:13, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Sandbox invite
E, when you have a chance, swing by my new project at User:Montanabw/Sandbox2 and offer any tidbits, sources, thoughts, advice, stuff you think ought to be in there, etc. Currently in very preliminary form, so watchlist if you want to be alerted when I'm in there playing! It's sort of an "I got the images so now am building the article" situation. LOL! All very rough now, so advice in any form helps, even just more for the rough outline. WIll source as I go, no fear. But this is a BLP, so I definitely want some eyes to keep me from going astray. Also, I actually got the video in the ref list but haven't watched it yet -- is there a wiki guide to proper citing of DVDs?? Montanabw (talk) 03:04, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Follow up: Now that you're home (welcome!  And how was the trip?) note that Sheila Varian is up and was a DYK.  Question:  Look over the material and see if you think at this point we still need separate articles on Bay-Abi and Bay el Bey or if we can just link references to them to the Varian page.  (I really don't know one way or the other, which is why I'm asking for your opinion!).  Oh, discovered another thing.  The new wiki-books thing won't render Ahnentafel templates at all.  I asked the gurus over there and all they can say at the moment is, "yup, it's a bug."   Not sure the fix, (the old table versions, perhaps?) but to make print copies of stuff, there is a bug that makes the pedigrees not format.  Phooey.   Montanabw (talk) 03:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

For all those watching ...
Am back in the US, but going to be busy for the next week with some stuff that has to be done before I can return to editing more seriously. Great to be home though! Ealdgyth - Talk 06:51, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Hemming's Cartulary
I've been through this now, and as usual I have a few questions:


 * Hemming's cartulary proper
 * "Hemming's work contains over 50 charters, some of which are also contained in the Liber." Is this literally the same manuscript appears twice in the work?
 * Mmm, duplicates of charter texts? That's how I would read it, too. Cavila (talk) 18:11, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Clarified. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * "The documents are either in Latin or in Old English." Makes it look like nobody's quite sure whether they're in Latin or Old English. Presumably this means that some are in Latin, others in Old English?


 * Yes, some are in Latin but some are in Old English, suggestions are welcome here... Ealdgyth - Talk 12:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * What about "Some of the documents are in Latin, others are in Old English"?


 * Fixed. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:48, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * "As well as charters, the work incorporates information from the sworn testimony from the region which was used to create Domesday Book, in two sections which are sometimes given the titles of "Indiculum libertatis" and "Oswald's Indiculum". Just can't follow this at all. In particular, what does "incorporates information from the sworn testimony from the region which was used to create Domesday Book" mean?
 * May I suggest rephrasing this to something like: "In two sections, which are sometimes entitled "Indiculum Libertatis" and "Oswald's Indiculum", the work not only draws on charters but also incorporates regional information from a different type of source recording the holdings of tenants-in-chief. This has been identified as the documentation assembled at the shire-courts for the so-called Domesday survey, [which was] commissioned by William the Conqueror in 1085. More famously, the same records were later used for the compilation of Domesday Book." ? Still a little too dense perhaps? Cavila (talk) 18:11, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Cavila's suggestion works for me... Ealdgyth - Talk 12:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Reworded per Cavila. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hemming's work
 * "Other similar works were the Norman pancartes, which were compilations of gifts to a monastery, connected by a narrative which was then presented to the duke in order to secure confirmation of the gifts." Which duke is this? William the Conqueror?


 * actually it's "dukes" plural, clarified. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Contents
 * "Hemming may have invented Eadric's byname of Streona ...". It would be interesting to know what Streona means, otherwise I'm not sure of the point of including this.
 * You may have overlooked a sentence there, which explains it as meaning "grasper", or are you referring to the relevance of that byname? It could be made more explicit that it's usually taken to refer to Eadric's reputation for seizing property (from Old English streonan "to acquire, seize, etc.") rather than anything to do with sexual harassment or being extremely 'cuddlesome'. Cavila (talk) 18:11, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Malleus Fatuorum 14:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, muchly. I'll get to these tomorrow, the stepdaughter is in town again... so between that and the huge thunderstorms rolling through the area making the electricity somewhat iffy, I'm not getting much accomplished right now. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Hoxne Hoard
This has had massive attention at FAC, but I don't think it's had a sources review - at least, I can't find one. Could you possibly do this? I'm doing the Russian National Anthem. Brianboulton (talk) 14:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Any others? Ealdgyth - Talk 15:17, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for considering the Egyptian genealogy issue resolved, and thanks for making me examine my reasons for admiring this site. To me (perhaps to you also) the word "genealogy" on a website drives me away: I have found just two that are far above the usual level -- this one and Medlands -- my reasons, in both cases, being that they cite primary and secondary sources, they use these sources properly, they discuss difficult cases, they admit their inability to determine some issues, and their citations, when tested, are reliable. In neither case do the authors broadcast their qualifications -- maybe they haven't time! genealogy must be at least as obsessive as encyclopedia-writing -- but Chris Bennett, who runs this Egyptian site, is cited in other Wikipedia articles for his published work. From a Google search he appears to be (like me) an "independent scholar" who gets invited to academic conferences etc. And rew D alby  08:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I do enough genealogy for my own family that I generally have a low opinion of most "genealogy" sites on the web. Thankfully, there are a few sites that do okay, but the problem with them and wikipedia is that they are difficult to fit into the reliable sources policies without opening the door to millions of other "crap" sites. I think your solution was probably the best you could do. Maybe the author will publish something from one of the conferences he goes to....or perhaps something in some of the "popular" history magazines like History Today or similar. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)