User talk:Ealdgyth/Archive 34

Middle Ages
Hello Ealdgyth! I realise that my criticism of that lead image, and my insistence on getting it changed is distressing you. I am sorry that the process has been so unpleasant. I realise that I have been rather bulldoggish about it. But it is a matter of principal.

I have appealed to both Johnbod and Nev1 to get over there and comment. I cannot understand why neither of them have bought into the discussion.

Please don't take this personally. You just happen to be the person in the front line.

My statement that you probably hadn't read the whole discussion was not meant to be offensive; the assumption was based on the fact that the question had already been answered. Likewise, I did not mean to imply that it was you who had done the reverting.

If you are not getting any consensus from the other major contributors, having stood your ground for so long, you might have to act independently.

It is pointless searching for further arguments in support of the reproduction object, just to maintain the status quo.

I guess it's about 5:30 am where Johnbo and Nev are, so there's no point in expecting them onboard for a few hours yet.

Amandajm (talk) 04:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Amandajam, when you are "not getting any consensus from other major contributors," maybe you need to realize it's time to drop the STICK. This isn't life and death.  Montanabw (talk) 18:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Montanabw, This is Ealdgyth's talk page. The message wasn't directed at you, but at Ealdgyth. And it was apologetic and conciliatory, rather than offensive. So why don't you butt out, and put this comment either on the talk page of Middle Ages or my personal talk page, rather than on someone else's talk page.  Ealdgyth can reply, should she choose to do so.  Amandajm (talk) 02:11, 22 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Eadlgyth is my wiki-friend, and while your tone may have been intended as conciliatory, it didn't read that way. I defend my friends when people attack them.  You should take your own advice and take your concerns back to the talk page of the article in question.  I have no intention of diving into the drama of the Middle Ages page, thank you.   Montanabw (talk) 02:31, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Should you be interested in running for an Rfa...
...I could nominate you. Thought I'll drop by and ask you. Thanks. Wifione  Message 19:25, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Gah. Why the hell should I consider getting MORE abuse? Ugh. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:30, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply :) I understand your orientation. The tools need not be necessarily used by you for issues that may invite abuse (for example, blocking trolls), but can also be used productively in your normal editing scenario. From GAs to DYKs to FAs, we really need administrators to chip in in specific areas. Of course, it's your call, but you'll surely find good productive use of the tools in the work that you are doing currently. Do contact me if you change your mind (which I hope you will). Thanks. Wifione  Message 04:22, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Til Eulenspiegel
Til Eulenspiegel has a history of insulting people who disagree with him (or her). See the discussion at. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:23, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Heh. Is that bit about Winchester being the capital in ASE still in the article? Thanks for the note, it does shed some light on the situation. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:51, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It is in the London article. The articles on Winchester and Dorchester on Thames both say that Winchester replaced Dorchester as de facto capital. The Dorchester article cites Kirby's Earliest English Kings, although he only referrred to a change of see. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I've had run-ins with Til Eulenspiegel on some articles about Native Ameicans and related issues. Has some sort of nationalistic bent, not sure which nation... Montanabw (talk) 22:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've cite tagged both Winchester and Dorchester's claims... Ealdgyth - Talk 22:11, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:58, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOUR for Roger Norreis

 * Montanabw (talk) 01:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter
In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. , —who has never participated in the competition before—and follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:34, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Would I be correct in assuming...
...that this would be something you'd like to know about before the fact? Particularly given your recent comments on scheduling of TFAs? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:43, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Gerda notified Parrot of Doom instead of me, but I have his page watchlisted, so I noticed. I'd really rather that I never had to deal with a TFA, but I know its the price paid for an article being FA. I never go out of my way to request TFA, but I rarely oppose them - I should be available for that date. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:58, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:51, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Newbie and new article alert
Hi E, I think this one is up your alley: Hollywood Dun It, new article by a new editor, could use your tender loving touch. Horse definitely notable, but doesn't walk on water as far as I know (haven't checked with the Pope lately, though....) Anyway, heads up. I'm going to do a wee bit of very superficial cleanup there, but you have the books and expertise on QH topics, so shall defer to you on that. Montanabw (talk) 03:07, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

And one other thing
Want to do an informal Peer Reveiw/Pre-FAC look at Homer Davenport? It just sailed through GA, but needs more work for FAC, but I'm bleary-eyed at this point. I know I want to expand the horse material more to roughly balance the cartooning material, particularly the diplomatic maneuvering he had to do to go to the Middle East, but I'm in that "looked at it too long and can't see it anymore" phase. Also, Wehwalt and I both have been a little concerned about the lack of peer review feedback we've gotten to date and feel it needs outside eyes. I'd love your input! Montanabw (talk) 03:07, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


 * This is like the busiest week of the year for me in my computer gaming job. No way in hell I'll be able to look at anything until at least the early part of November. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:11, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


 * No rush, but can you put it on your list??  Montanabw (talk) 23:34, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


 * You're assuming I am organized enough to keep a list?????? Ealdgyth - Talk 23:40, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Cool! That means we're first when you ARE able to peek!  Check the talk page first, Wehwalt and I have posted a public discussion of where we feel stuck.  Montanabw (talk) 19:54, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:33, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

Main Page appearance: Walter de Coutances
This is a note to let the main editors of Walter de Coutances know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on November 16, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/November 16, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Walter de Coutances was a medieval Anglo-Norman Bishop of Lincoln and Archbishop of Rouen. He began his royal service in the government of Henry II, serving as a vice-chancellor. He also accumulated a number of ecclesiastical offices, becoming successively canon of Rouen Cathedral (pictured), treasurer of Rouen, and Archdeacon of Oxford. King Henry sent him on a number of diplomatic missions, and finally rewarded him with the Bishopric of Lincoln in 1183. He did not remain there long, for he was translated to the archbishopric of Rouen in late 1184. When Richard I, King Henry's son, became king in 1189, Coutances absolved Richard for his rebellion against his father and invested him as Duke of Normandy. He then accompanied Richard to Sicily as the king began the Third Crusade, but events in England prompted Richard to send the archbishop back to England to mediate between William Longchamp, the justiciar whom Richard had left in charge of the kingdom, and Prince John, Richard's younger brother. Coutances succeeded in securing a peace between Longchamp and John, but further actions by Longchamp led to the justiciar's expulsion from England. Coutances died in November 1207 and was buried in his cathedral. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 October newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is. Our final nine were as follows:

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:


 * wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
 * wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
 * wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
 * wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
 * wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
 * wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
 * wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
 * The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to, for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
 * Finally, the judges are awarding the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 01:18, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Congrats
Congrats on the wikicup top 10! Woo woo! Montanabw (talk) 03:10, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Bats
I saw your note re WBFAN and thought I'd give you one of these: Actually, although I live on the perimeter and pay little heed to metropolitan rumour I have to say that I have never heard your name mentioned in anything but a praiseworthy context. Please keep up the good work. Ben  Mac  Dui  20:51, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Heh. Cute. I was actually thinking of a 2'X4' "bat" - cluebat is just a redirect but... And thank you for the kind words! Ealdgyth - Talk 21:23, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, pleaseconsult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:25, 8 November 2013 (UTC)