User talk:JodyB/Archive 13

You handsome devil...
Nice picture! Just happened to pop up on my watchlist. Haven't run across you much since coaching, we must run in completely different circles. How've you been? Keeper  |   76   |   Disclaimer  19:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've been in Guyana for the past three weeks and wasn't around much leading up to that as I was getting ready to go. Are you regretting the new buttons yet? JodyBtalk 19:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Absolutely! Everyday!  Just read the last 2 days worth of my talkpage if you're bored.  I'm pretty sure that of my last 100 edits, 50 are my own talkpage replying to cries for help.  Another 20 or so at RFA/talkRFA, the rest AN/ANI.  I'm getting really close to declaring my talkpage closed for a week or so, just so I can go work on some articles (besides warning edit warriors, rollback abusers, CSD template removals, AFD closes....you get it).  No, but seriously, I was meant to be an admin I think.  I actually rather enjoy the meta stuff more, and I was never really a very good writer in the first place.  Wikipedia wins by having my incoherent fingers away from articles...:-).  On that depressing note, Guyana, eh?  Not exactly a "hotspot" for vacations for us Americanos.  What brought you there?   Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  19:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't be afraid to take a wikibreak! It'll do you good. See Lethem, Guyana for some pics I made. There is a school there that I teach in and send teachers to. It was my three week tour. JodyBtalk 19:56, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Very nice pics. What a beautiful slice of the world.  I'll read the article too in a minute.  I'm going on break for the weekend, good advice.  I'll probably linger around for another hour or two (while I'm at work I leave my watchlist open), then gone till Monday.  Cheers, good to chat with you, glad you're well!   Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  19:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Good deal Keeper, have a good weekend. JodyBtalk 20:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Protection of Joseph Konopka
Hi, please unprotect this article. I will take out "computer expert" and replace it with "former computer systems administrator" to satisfy "Proxy User" and add a reference for that. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Give me a couple of minutes and it will be done. I want you and the others to know that I have no personal interest in the outcome but edit wars must be prevented. Thank you for you willingness to compromise. -JodyBtalk 17:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Calendar block
FYI: I was curious so I looked at where you had added the calendar block and noticed the font colors seemed off. After checking, it appears that you have an open  tag in your header template that is causing the calendar text to not sync to what the calendar code is using in its   tags. I don't like editing other people's userpage templates (for all I know, you have that span tag open for some other purpose of which I'm not aware), so I just thought I would mention it in case you hadn't noticed. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:02, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I'm afraid I'm not creative enough to do something like that on purpose. I'll take a look and thanks again. -JodyBtalk 20:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hoping to be adopted
Hi,

I just started a new account and getting back into editing/writing (wrote a few pages a year ago). I'd love to get some guidance as I start again, I don't know much of the conventions and policies about how to go about contributing and editing. I'm interested in general involvement in the community and also in researching/writing articles on different topics with an emphasis on history, IT, and Social Networks (I'm a programmer). You seem like a really good fit and I'm wondering if your taking on any other adoptees? Thanks alot!

Will you please adopt me? Rohit Reddy (talk) 13:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Cohors II Gallorum
Hi. Thanks for your support. Frankly, I regard this deletion proposal as absurd. This article is just a small part of the overall project I have set myself of providing Wikipedia with comprehensive coverage of the topic of Roman auxiliaries. To that end, I have already created the main articles Roman auxiliaries and List of Roman auxiliary regiments. Cohors II Gallorum veterana equitata is intended as the the first of individual entries for all 400+ known Roman auxiliary regiments, each linked to the List article (in the same way as each Roman legion has an individual article). No sooner did I complete it, than someone slaps a deletion notice on it, without even the courtesy of discussing it with me first. He then takes a phrase from my response out of its context and uses it to support his own argument. When I said there is nothing special about this unit, I meant sinply that it is one out of the 400 that need a biography.

As regards your suggestions for expansion and including other sources: there are at least two other works that discuss this unit, but their data is included in the source I quote, which is the most comprehensive and up-to-date work on the evidence for these regiments. As regards expansion, there is not much more to be said without going into excessive and unproductive detail: the evidence for each of these regiments is limited to a series of inscriptions on military diplomas and tombstones etc. But I can see absolutely no valid reason why this article should not stand as it is. It concerns a historic military unit, it is properly referenced to a reputable academic source and it is my own words so there is no copyright infringement. Well, let's hope that commonsense prevails and that I can get on with finishing this project: you would think the administrators would thank me for it, rather than try to obstruct it! Best wishes EraNavigator (talk) 22:22, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I would still encourage you to add those other sources. It may be tedious but it is significant to show that this is a noteworthy topic. I agree that the article should be kept but I am not knowledgeable in the field so I am afraid I am little help. -JodyBtalk 02:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Log for Gojilla
there is no deletion log for the Gojilla page. since you deleted the page i figured i should bring this to your attention. J.L.Main (talk) 07:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I see it. It says: 15:42, 22 August 2007 JodyB (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Gojilla" ‎ (not notable, no assertion of notability). -JodyBtalk 11:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Username length test...
I made the account as a test per Wikipedia_talk:Username_policy And when I went to block it myself, you'd gotten there first! -- Flyguy649 talk 17:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I wondered about it. If you need to be unblocked go ahead. Sounds legitimate to me. JodyBtalk 17:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Nah. It was just to check the possible allowable length. If I need the account (which I don't!) I'll unblock it myself. I think I'll go a scramble the password, though. Cheers! -- Flyguy649 talk 18:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: cobbled streets
Hey, I replied on my talk page but then got to wondering... you didn't happen to go see the launch of the Independence yesterday at Austal did you? I would be great if we could get a shot of it for the USS Independence (LCS-2) article.  Altairisfar talk  17:53, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No I didn't, at least not in person. I saw it on one of the TV stations last night. You think they would let me come make a pic? I'll call in the morning and if they will let me I'll post one by tomorrow night. We'll never know if we don't ask! -JodyBtalk 21:26, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That would be cool!  Altairisfar talk  21:51, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Roman auxiliary cohorts
Hi. Having done 25 or so regiments, I have come to the conclusion that the available evidence is mostly too thin to support individual entries for each regiment: often just one short paragraph can cover it. I therefore propose to combine all the regiments for each tribal name into one article. As an example for discussion, I have done that for all the cohortes Raetorum. Please see Raetorum auxiliary cohorts. What do you think? Regards EraNavigator (talk) 13:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks good to me. Should we add redirects from the individual articles to the new one?m -JodyBtalk 16:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes. The idea is that the combined article carries all the useful data and so the individual articles are no longer necessary. They should therefore be deleted. Please do that now for the Raetorum entries. I'm now working on producing the same for Alpinorum, Delmatarum, and Gallorum cohorts. I'll let you know when they are complete so you can erase the respective individual articles (but not before, since I'm copying and pasting the data). After that, I'll write only combined articles and no more individual ones. Regards EraNavigator (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, What I've done is delete the content of the Raetorum articles and redirected the pages to the main article Raetorum auxiliary cohorts. That way, if someone searches on an individual cohort they will be taken to the main article. We'll do the same for the others when you're finished. -JodyBtalk 21:19, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks. I'm glad I can count on someone who knows his way about the Wikipedia maze. Regards EraNavigator (talk) 20:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Excuse me, maybe it's my ignorance of Wiki ways. You say you've deleted the content of the individual Raetorum articles. But if I click on, say, cohors I Raetorum, I still get the individual article. EraNavigator (talk) 21:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)