User talk:Johnbod/26

Disambiguation link notification for May 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Art in Medieval Scotland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Yetholm


 * Palladium (protective image) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Iconoclast


 * Periodization (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Victorian


 * Portrait of the Four Tetrarchs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Porphyry


 * The Feast in the House of Levi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Judas

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Miscellany Article
Hi Johnbod,

Thank you for your recent additions to the miscellany article - they were great to read! It was always lacking slightly on the medieval front (this is not my area of expertise), and so I was very pleased to see someone else contributing to make the article better. Since you have obviously looked quite closely at the article, I was wondering whether you had any comments as to how it might be further improved - and specifically what, content-wise, I might need to do to it to achieve 'good article' status?

Many thanks again,

BridgenAJ (talk) 17:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Equally I don't know that much about the later EM literary tradition, but it all looked pretty good to me - nice work! My bits are perhaps a tad short of references (relying on lots of links), but otherwise I think it could well be ready for GA, which I find a very variable hurdle, as it all depends on one reviewer. I thought it might well be worth exploring further the very common use of "miscellany" in the titles of early magazines - it seems to have almost been the dominant word to describe the idea of a magazine for a while. Obviously these aren't exactly the same thing. Seach on "miscellany a" here & you'll see articles on a number. Johnbod (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I was also thinking of mentioning other uses of the term 'miscellany' - as sometimes a more vague descriptor of various bits of writing by just one author. I guess at heart the question is whether a miscellany is determined by a variety of (a) authors, or (b) contents (b normally leading from a) - because its not always the case that you get both. I agree that the magazine use (appropriation?) of the term is important too - I could discuss it in the 'Decline/19th C' section. I'll work on these aspects and then give GA a go. Thanks, BridgenAJ (talk) 17:28, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually it goes into the magazine bit more than I remember. I've added some links etc, & will hope to do more, but I'll comment on the talk page there. Should you have more on the use and circulation of manuscript miscellanies? Were not at least some passed around a circle, while others perhaps not? Johnbod (talk) 17:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Great, nice to see more pictures already. The production-process of manuscript miscellanies was almost always unique - it would sometimes be overseen by one editor/transcriber, or sometimes passed around more freely. I guess I could expand the examples given to include mention of how they were each constructed - will need to do some digging! BridgenAJ (talk) 18:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Johnbod, I replied to your message (re. Did You Know) on my talkpage - and have further queries there. BridgenAJ (talk) 12:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Prime version
The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

CFD note
Hi, you wrote at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_March_30 that
 * "Illuminated" is of course a sub-category of "illustrated"

I think you meant vice versa. Kind regards – Fayenatic  L ondon 16:59, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No - Any book with pictures is illustrated - illuminated applies only to manuscripts, & so on. Johnbod (talk) 17:55, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, right. You weren't referring to the Wikipedia categories for manuscripts, then. That makes sense now.
 * Mind you, to use the word "sub-category" on a CFD page to mean something else... perhaps "sub-set" would be clearer. – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * True, sorry! I'll change it. Johnbod (talk) 22:44, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

FAC for Duino Elegies
FAC delegate GrahamColm reinstated my FAC for Duino Elegies after reviewing the matter subsequent to our comments on his talk page. If you have any further comments or suggestions, I would like to address them forthwith (especially any issues you have with the prose that you've mentioned) and I very much appreciate your continued interest and support.--ColonelHenry (talk) 17:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

VA
Note I'm not adding it because I want to, but because of this. Unless it is removed, it would not be correct the Visual arts article is ??? important to the project Visual arts, when it is clearly Top (as long as the rating exists). Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  05:12, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The project does not do importance ratings - of course many people add them (usually very badly) to lots of projects, and about 2 of the 18 K articles have them. But a wildly incomplete scheme is worse than no scheme at all, and if you can be bothered they should all be removed when seen. Look at the other 11 odd in trhe "Top" category (which should be deleted) - it's a joke. I've changed the template back & will revert you again - please do not readd without discussing at the project. ThanksJohnbod (talk) 12:17, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, but do't treat me as if I added the importance rating in the first place. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  19:24, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, sure Johnbod (talk) 19:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Anno Mundi
The original styling for this was BCE/CE, so then per policy, we need to revert the entire article back to that style. -- Avi (talk) 19:18, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No it wasn't - oldest edits. Don't you EVER check anything before you pronounce so confidently? Johnbod (talk) 20:06, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for North French Hebrew Miscellany
The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: April in the UK
Hello Johnbod, You have written before for the newsletter This Month in GLAM. I see the UK is missing regarding the edition about April 2013, do you perhaps have any idea what GLAM activities were done in the UK in April? Can you perhaps write about those? Or do you know who I can ask to write about it? Thanks! (Deadline of the April edition is 8 May.) You can start writing at the page GLAM/Newsletter/Newsroom. If you wish to be informed by e-mail next time, please write me at this page. You can reach me the best at nl-wiki talk page. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 18:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * PS: Certainly also about GLAM-WIKI in London would be nice to read about that. It was nice meeting you in London with the GLAM-WIKI conference. Romaine (talk) 18:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Opps, sorry, missed it! Great to meet you too. Johnbod (talk) 19:46, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Miscellany
The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Just nominated in fact! Johnbod (talk) 19:46, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Vitreous enamel
Actually I broadly agree with your revert. Mine was mainly prompted by your removal of the first para which referred to cloisonné, which is a vitreous enamel technique. I personally disagree with your point about enameled glass - since it is the enamel that is vitreous and it should not be relevant what the substrate is. Some practitioners refer to it as glass painting, others as enameling, names used to distinguish the technique from other methods of glass coloring and decoration. However, the text you deleted was of poor quality anyway. Plantsurfer (talk) 08:48, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I've no problem with cloisonné at all - I think I wrote the previous two paras on it, and also all the earlier history at cloisonné itself. But if it was much used in Islamic art (another of mine) it's news to me. I think he was mixing cloisonné and (Islamic) glass painting up, and Byzantine & Islamic stuff generally. And modern historians all tend to downplay the Crusades as a motor of cultural transmission or trade between Europe and Islam. Johnbod (talk) 09:34, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Antoine Seilern, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Princes Gate and Intelligence Corps (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:23, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Gold glass
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Dome of the Rock
I had thought these tiles File:Israel-2013-Jerusalem-Temple Mount-Dome of the Rock-Detail 01.jpg were actually 16-17th century, not 19th... -- Godot13 (talk) 15:42, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * You might be right (or the file might be) - but note that the central bay in the pic, surrounded by the really lurid green, has different and less attractive arabesque spandrels. I have difficulty seeing the glaring yellow fussy horizontal panels on either side above the arches as 16th century either. I'm sure much of it could be, but the photo doesn't read clearly as a thumb, & I think a close-up that shows the complicated tile shapes often used is better. Johnbod (talk) 16:16, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Quest
It was good that you came in to look at the quest page, given that my time is up next week. I already said all the good byes a year ago. But that page does not need much attention - this one does and I just did an FAQ for it. If you feel like keeping an eye on, and   that would be nice, for they have all been cleaned up now. I did a FAQ for one of them just yesterday. There is also and , the last one having an interesting Henry-VIII story. Take care, and best wishes. History2007 (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Ouch! Don't know I can handle all that lot, but I'll do something. Very sorry if you really are going. Thanks for all your contributions & chats. All the best, Johnbod (talk) 00:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. The key 2 pages that have "real content" are Historicity and Josephus. They do not need any new material, but there may be merge flags etc. and an occasional vote or comment here and there will help. They both have FAQs and pretty stable, but they often get on people's nerves for other reasons. But they cover all bases on those topics now - they are totally referenced. Take care. History2007 (talk) 08:39, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

RFC on TFA images
Dear Johnbod, you may be interested in a discussion that I've started at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article. All views welcome. BencherliteTalk 16:29, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Fuck U very much!
Haha, John, this was a terrible idea and I blame you for it. Happy trails, Drmies (talk) 18:57, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeaaah, fantastic! You may have to take a course in Californian I realize, but that's nothing for a man of your qualities. Johnbod (talk) 20:01, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Wait--there's cocaine involved? Seriously, thanks--I have been having to think of myself in very different terms this afternoon. Sheesh, I might have to act responsibly. I suppose it's not done to put a big notice up on my user talk page? :) Drmies (talk) 23:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


 * John, do you know why I can't answer the questions, like on Wikimedia Foundation elections/Board elections/2013/Questions/2 (on meta, of course)? When I click edit it says the section no longer exists. I had this a few days ago already and thought it a temporary problem--this might completely derail my campaign. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:59, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Go straight to the top - ask Risker on meta. They stop them when voting starts I think, but that isn't yet is it? Oh, it has started. I can't see anything in the rules saying when you have to answer by, so make a fuss! Johnbod (talk) 04:01, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

UK Wikimedian of the Year 2013/Nominations
The Wikimedia UK AGM will be held in June, and nominations for the UK Wikimedian of the Year are currently open. If there is someone who you feel has made an important contribution to the UK Wikimedia movement in the last year please go ahead and nominate them here by 09:00 (BST) on Monday 20th May at the latest. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 13:14, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

RE: Better read this
Did you not see that there were already 2, spelled with an s in the rest of the article?

I admit I could have been misreading that though ... nah, just checked, there were three altogether and one had z while the others had s. I just matched them.

Apologies for not putting that in the summary, it was a little misleading without it. Chaosdruid (talk) 01:38, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no, I didn't look closely, but one sees so many edits where the izes are removed, which gets me down as I use them in BE myself. Johnbod (talk) 02:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem :¬) I know that feeling well. My brother is American now, as is his wife (they have lived there for years and their children were born there so they became citizens themselves a few years ago), and other family members include Swedish and Ukrainian - quite a pronunciation and understanding nightmare let me tell you! and spelling, well, don't get me started lol.
 * The biggest problem is the education system that tried to separate us UKers from the USers. Lets be honest, z was used until very recently, though we aren't really taught that :¬)
 * In fact, I remember one day when we were all in the UK and someone asked for some chips - it took 5 minutes before everyone knew exactly what we were all talking about as everyone tried to do it in the others language and no-one knew what the hell anyone was talking about for the first few minutes ... "Chips? With fish?" lol - and my brother is currently practising "Gotten off of" as his learning UK -> US phrase of the month :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 22:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Crwth images
Thanks John. Both emails (National Library and St Fagan's National Museum) are included on the imagaes' Talk pages and do allow iw use on Wikipedia, and therefore uploading to Commons. You're more than welcome to do so! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 09:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Gibbet of Montfaucon
 Harrias  talk 17:21, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Portrait of Sir Thomas More (Holbein), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Portrait Gallery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:42, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Help deleting article "Verismo by Starbucks"
Hi-- I finally got around to moving the information regarding the "Verismo by Starbucks" coffee system to the Starbucks page Products section (as a reminder, you commented on my proposal to do so on the talk page for that article). I also removed link from the Verismo disambiguation page. I'm not quite sure how to delete or archive the existing (now merged) Verismo by Starbucks page. Can you help? Much appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by David.thompson.esq (talk • contribs) 03:38, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * You just redirect it - hang on a second. Johnbod (talk) 03:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Done I also copied a bit more over. Johnbod (talk) 03:48, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! David.thompson.esq (talk) 04:23, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Invitation for taking a short survey about communication and efficiency of WikiProjects for my research
Hi Johnbod, I'm working on a project to study the running of WikiProject and possible performance measures for it. I learn from WikiProject Visual arts talk page that you are an active member of the project. I would like to invite you to take a short survey for my study. If you are available to take our survey, could you please reply an email to me? I'm new to Wikipedia, I can't send too many emails to other editors due to anti-spam measure. Thank you very much for your time. Xiangju (talk) 14:50, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm wondering why
you axed that reference at Sculpture? Because it is (or at least pears to be) in French? Carptrash (talk) 17:20, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes of course, and far too narrow. Also it was added to "references" though it has not been used in the article. He is spamming mostly Quebec-related stuff all over the place. Johnbod (talk) 17:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Medieval Rome
Any suggestion about where to link, or possibly create a redirect, for medieval Rome? I s'pose I expected an article to exist. Rome is puny. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:44, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 'Fraid not, though we have lots of bits in the History of the Papacy & on the gangster-princes who ran the place etc., which might produce a flat-pack article quite quickly. Enjoyed the Signpost thing - do you have JSTOR? If not you & Davidiad are welcome to ask for PDFs. Johnbod (talk) 17:48, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
 * What Signpost thing? OMG, did they actually do something with our ramblings? (Davidiad has JSTOR and bounteous resources; I do not, though I once did through my former institution and miss it horribly. I've offered my little finger in exchange for WP access, but the powers that be were unmoved.) Maybe I'll just leave the redlink and wait for something to materialize, then. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:47, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia Signpost/2013-05-20/WikiProject report, Johnbod (talk) 19:25, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


 * History of Rome has a more detail than the main article on Rome. Having only just found the article, I won't comment on its quality. Nev1 (talk) 19:42, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, much better thanks, though starting off better than it finishes. It was a truly bizarre place in the high & late MA. Johnbod (talk) 20:04, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=556893771 your edit] to Political correctness may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].

Disambiguation link notification for May 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Coronation of Queen Victoria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Pall Mall and Pageantry


 * Agriculture (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Fig

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:58, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Muhammad cartoons and aniconism
Hi,

Some time ago you had left some recommendations regarding the section on aniconism on the Muhammad cartoons crisis page. Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy. I have finally had a moment to edit the section. I've simplified the claims a little bit, and cut some of the information because this is only supposed to be background to a page that is already getting longer than recommended. But I would appreciate if you have the time, and when you have a moment, to have a quick look and see if it satisfies your concerns. Thanks for your help on this, Peregrine981 (talk) 14:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Lycée Français Charles de Gaulle
Hi again Johnbod (talk). I have an urgent message for you about your change to the Lycée Français Charles de Gaulle page:

Thank you very much for your reply to me on my talk page. I thought I'd give you a chance to respond to my reply, but as it's been a couple of days now since my reply to your latest message, I think it's possible that you may have decided that the matter had been finally resolved, and not checked my talk page again. Please see my reply to you on there, as although it's clear that the fees for the main ('French') section of the Lycée Français Charles de Gaulle, (where pupils start at the age of three) are lower than for the 'British' section (where they start at the age of thirteen), I can't see any evidence that the French Government actually subsidises their fees (as I'm sure you know, the lower fees for younger pupils are not themselves evidence of a subsidy from it), and I think that that unsourced assertion needs to be removed as soon as possible.

I look forward to your reply there. Many thanks again. Zhu Haifeng (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Reference added. Johnbod (talk) 23:18, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Ruut Veenhoven
The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much
Thank you for your copy-editing help at Everything Tastes Better with Bacon. Much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:35, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Just calling to your attention
Just wanted to make sure The Barber Cup and Crawford Cup was on your radar. Title probably needs fixed. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:18, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks - the BM project had a photo request, but I hadn't seen this. Since the two were found together, I don't fuss about a joint article, at least while it's a stub. I've added bits. Johnbod (talk) 14:45, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Do we use the "The" for such objects? Thanks especially for the categories. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:00, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * no we shouldn't. Johnbod (talk) 15:07, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Coronation of Queen Victoria
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:37, 2 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Well done. I have another Queen Victoria DYK in mind but need to get a good photo first.  I'm going to try the V&A and Kensington Palace - do we have any contacts there? Andrew Davidson (talk) 17:02, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The V&A conceivably. But photos should be out of copyright one would think. What do you want? Johnbod (talk) 17:07, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Reverted edits on Coronation of Queen Victoria
I'm wondering why you reverted all of my edits on this page. Here was your edit summary: "(rvt most - BE normally uses upper case. Other edits a mixed bag but on the whole not an improvement)". Could you please explain how corrections to basic sentence and paragraph structure mistakes aren't an improvement to the article? The structure was severely lacking before my edits.

I reverted your revert edit because you say nothing as to WHY the edits were not an improvement, and I am very curious as to why you or anyone wouldn't think that they are when they are non-fact-based, purely structural improvements (such as correction of super-run-on sentences, addition of commas where necessary, the removal of the word "but" that began a sentence (grammatically incorrect) and removal of excess information that is mentioned in other articles, such as Queen Victoria (the bit about her father dying) and the Bedchamber Crisis (the bit about the Ladies-in-waiting) as those pieces of information are not immediately relevant to the article and can be found elsewhere on Wikipedia). I realize that it's an article you started and wrote most of, and I give you all due respect for that, but I also think you should be open to basic structural improvements by other editors where they are clearly necessary.

And I do apologize if I seem agitated. I probably shouldn't have so hastily undone your revert edit without a discussion taking place first, but I was quite surprised to find that my edits had been completely reverted, not to mention the fact that not even one of my edits qualified as an "improvement" to the article in your opinion. Samuel Peoples (talk) 02:30, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * What I mainly objected to was the "removal of excess information that is mentioned in other articles, such as Queen Victoria (the bit about her father dying) and the Bedchamber Crisis (the bit about the Ladies-in-waiting) as those pieces of information are not immediately relevant to the article and can be found elsewhere on Wikipedia)." This is no reason to remove information (there is not even a link to her father in fact, which maybe there should be). There is no rule that a piece of information can only appear once in WP; that would be ridiculous. The meaning was changed in a number of other places, which it should not be, especially as you have presumably not seen the references. There were too many edits to works through so I just reverted the lot, but now I will revert and readd those I think are improvements. Some of the rearrangements of sentences were fine, as my edit summary suggested. Many of your changes seem footling with word-choices for no gain, for example I really can't see that: "Although she mentioned some favourable aspects..." is better than "Although she recorded some favourable comments..." or why "For most of the country, though, the day was a celebration without much questioning" improves on "But for most of the country the day was a celebration unmixed with much questioning ..." - both seem worse to me, but I don't want to get into a protracted discussion of why.  Johnbod (talk) 11:27, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I wasn't trying to conform to any rule that says something "can only appear once in Wikipedia". Those specific edits improved the conciseness of the page. Surely conciseness is an important quality? There was too much extraneous information in those specific examples, and I was able to make them more concise without changing the meaning. As for other places, I never changed the meaning of what was said, only the way it was said. I noticed that you have kept a few of the page's run-on sentences that I corrected without changing the meaning, as well as sentences that were simply poorly constructed (the one regarding Harriet Martineau being in the abbey was particularly unclear). It's fair that you think I shouldn't have changed "favourable comments" to "favourable aspects", and it is debatable whether or not it is correct to use the word "but" to start a sentence, so that's fine. But the other edits were purely structural improvements and should have been kept for the sake of the clearness and conciseness of the article. Samuel Peoples (talk) 19:39, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Well I disagree. For example your change re the Whig election campaign did change the meaning, taking it further from the source. Johnbod (talk) 19:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Please check my latest edit. I've tried to compromise in making more conservative edits to basic structure and changed less of the meanings of the sentences. Feel free to revert any edits again if you feel the changes still venture too far from the source. I mainly fixed the run-on sentences (fewer wording changes), made the sentence about Harriet Martineau's presence in the abbey more clear, corrected one instance of "Marquis" to "Marquess", and added a comma where necessary.. I still think the other changes were good, especially those removing extraneous information, but I cannot seem to convince you of that. Samuel Peoples (talk) 20:24, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks =)
I firstly want to congratulate you on being the first person to respond to my plea for help on the Police protection provisions article =P and also thank you for adding some categories.. I always forget to do that! Cheers, ツStacey (talk) 11:26, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Michael Sittow (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Assumption


 * Rosalia (festival) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Martyrium

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:25, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=558424667 your edit] to History painting may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].

Please calm down
I just noticed your WP:NPA edit summary at Category:Historical painters; "blatently untrue - I see you prefer reverting to responding on talk!". I have no idea why you would even dare to use such an edit summary when I am the one that started the discussion at Category talk:Historical painters one hour before your edit (a discussion you haven't joined yet), and that I was the one that started the discussion at Talk:History painting, and that I had replied on my user talk page as well before you made that edit. Please don't make accusations in edit summaries in general, and certainly not when they are completely opposite to what happened in reality. Fram (talk) 13:43, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Any reason why you continue to make this more confrontational and personal than necessary? Trying to win a discussion by incporrectly playing the "expert" card ("Unlike you I have the disadvantage of actually knowing something about the subject"), claiming that an edit that disagrees with you is "verging on vandalism"... I'm not claiming that your thoughtless reversions are vandalism (even though they reintroduce nonsensical sentences like "Paintings almost always contain a number of figures, often a large number."), it would be nice if you could follow the same basic civility standards in return. Fram (talk) 14:19, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

WP Fashion in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Fashion for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 16:23, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Ciao!
Hi John! How are you? I recently made my deadly comeback in the wikiworld, with the following masterwork articles among the others: Palazzo degli Alberti, Triptych of Temptations of St. Anthony and The Hermit Saints. In particular the latter two, I'd ask you (as usual, if you have time and will) to give a check to my mediocre English. Ciao again and thanks in advance. --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 15:03, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * sure - give a few days. Johnbod (talk) 15:28, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * thanks a lot. --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 14:46, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

RfC on title of Sarah Brown (wife of Gordon Brown)
Hi, this is to let everyone who commented in the last RM know that there's another RM/RfC here, in case you'd like to comment again. Best, SlimVirgin (talk) 19:11, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Navicella (mosaic)
Gatoclass 08:02, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Gibbet of Montfaucon at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 18:45, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Isabeau
Thanks for touching up there and adding links - I was particularly impressed that you found one for the entry - I'd looked and but hadn't thought of ceremonial entry. For some reason. Victoria (talk) 19:53, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Right - I'll be doing more later. Wetman & I did Royal entry ages ago - I might add the details of Isabeau's Johnbod (talk) 00:14, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, belated response. That's a very nice article, I must say. Definitely add details from Isabeau's entry, since Tuchman provides a good description. On another subject, we can't use this as a lead image, can we? I know I've asked you about this before, but isn't the rule for 3D art that the picture has to have been taken a long time ago, or have been released to the public domain? Victoria (talk) 00:30, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Which one do you mean? I see 15. But yes, essentially that is the rule. Johnbod (talk) 00:53, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, wrong link. This statue. Victoria (talk) 00:59, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to keep bothering you, still working on these images. If you have Jstor access, can you look at this file. I'm trying to identify the triptych shown a couple pages in so as to provide an accurate description for File:Michelle de Valois in 15th Century artwork.jpg. Left a similar message for Ceoil too. I thought one of the two of you would know. Thanks. Victoria (talk) 16:59, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This one I think We have other pics. Johnbod (talk) 18:01, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Found them. Thanks a lot. Very interesting piece. Victoria (talk) 18:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The only problem is that file we identify as Michelle is not the same woman the writer identifies; he identifies this - which has since been indentified as Isabella of Portugal. Confusing. But thanks; now I need to dig. Victoria (talk) 19:17, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Ossian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Epic and Frontispiece


 * Chinaman (porcelain) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to West End


 * History painting (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Orientalist


 * Prime version (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Orientalist


 * The Hermit Saints (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Oratory

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:45, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Ritual discipline
Not sure what your objection is to the wording. Why is this considered weird?Schrauwers (talk) 18:18, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Are you a native speaker? It sounds like, indeed the primary meaning would be, something from the worlds of BDSM or corporal punishment. Btw using the article title again in section headings is deprecated. But good work btw, though we are in danger of having a purely anthropological treatment of the subject. Johnbod (talk) 19:57, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hopefully the new wording brings us back from the torrid edge. Much of the first part of the article draws heavily on the work of Catherine Bell, in religious studies, not anthropology. Looking forward to the contributions of others as well. Schrauwers (talk) 01:21, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm happy with anything that avoids the previous implication. Since these article are largely read by a pretty young audience, it's good to sprinkle lots of linked examples & pics in. The article views show what I call a "homework distribution" pretty strongly. Johnbod (talk) 01:27, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Michael Dowd (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Evangelist


 * Private collection (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Enlightenment

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Teramo
Ciao! Can I harm you and ask four your opinion at the n-th edit war started by the Teramo guy? Again, in my experience, there's no wikicomparison between my version and his amateurish one, but it's my opinion of course... Ciao and good work. --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 21:33, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Drowning Girl at WP:FAC
As the only editor who remains active with more than three edits at the discussion my first successful WP:FA, Campbell's Soup Cans, I thought you might want to comment at Featured article candidates/Drowning Girl/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Request for input in drafting potential guidelines
Hi. There are, at present, no particular clear guidelines for religious material here, or, for that matter, guidelines for how to deal with ideas in general, particularly those ideas which might be accepted as true by individuals of a given religious, political, or scientific stance. There have been attempts in the past to draft such guidelines, but they have quickly been derailed. I am dropping this note on the talk pages of a number of editors who I believe have some interest in these topics, such as yourself, and asking them to review the material at User:John Carter/Guidelines discussion and perhaps take part in an effort to decide what should be covered in such guidelines, should they be determined useful, and what phrasing should be used. I would be honored to have your input.

P. S. Having been away for a few months, getting together some lists and whatever, I noticed that History2007 has seemingly vanished in the interim, which really sucks given the amount of effort and attention he gave to ensuring historical accuracy of content. You were working with him on the Jesus article, so far as I recall, and if you have any way to get his attention now, like maybe his e-mail, I would welcome his input here as well. John Carter (talk) 19:26, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no, & I wasn't doing anything on Jesus though we worked on other things. Johnbod (talk) 13:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hungarian National Museum, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Neoclassical, Avar and Arpad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

ANI (Wagner talk page)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Smerus (talk) 16:08, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, saw that thanks - the new notification thingy has its uses. Johnbod (talk) 16:39, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Jesus' walk on water move request
Hi there

You recently participated in a move request for the Jesus' walk on water article. There was no consensus for the proposed move, but some suggested the new possible title of Jesus walking on water and I have reopened the move request with that as the move target. If you are interested, please contribute to the debate at Talk:Jesus' walk on water. Thanks! &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 13:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Oxus Treasure
Hello! Your submission of Oxus Treasure at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Rosiestep (talk) 21:15, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry
..I meant the tag; not the references. I always think, why tag & not fix? Anyway, sorry about that. Victoria (talk) 16:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry for what? - a student attacked the article ages ago, from some class I've never been able to track down that ravages a bunch of medieval art articles some years. It needs sorting out, though it was never that good. Johnbod (talk) 16:22, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Edit summary was a bit snarky, . Yeah, a lot of those articles have been attacked. Victoria (talk) 16:30, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Two things: 1., I thought you were reverting me with your edit summary of "as it was" - that's why I apologized. 2., can we use this pic? Photo has a copyright. Hard to find anything by this guy, but I'd like at least one image. Thanks. Victoria (talk) 16:24, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

What?
You recently left a bizarre and libelous message on my talk page. For the record, you are full of it. Even if you weren't, your reckless and untrue accusations would, in a just world, get you blackballed from the site.TheCormac (talk) 01:13, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Medieval jewelry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Armilla


 * Oxus Treasure (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bezel

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Oxus Treasure
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Cuthbert
I do not know what the sodding problem is here. Is it termed biting? The saint was born presumably according to the sources in the Kingdom of Northumbria which the article does state, an independent kingdom that reached at its height from the Forth to the Humber, that was settled by the Anglian people. Saxons settled in the south of what is now England and left their tribal names in places like Sussex, Middlesex, Essex, Wessex etc. This was not the case in Northumbria, Mercia, East Anglia and really most of the rest of present day England which were settled by other tribes. It's just a matter of common sense. Furthermore this is not an edit-war, as it is two (maybe three) against one, and who presumably have not read my inputs on the talkpage but just fancy a barney? Cuthbert's cultus may have been appropriated by the Kings of Wessex, and latterly the Norman and Plantagenet Kings of England, but the man is a Northumbrian through and through. As I have previously noted, I live about equidistant between two of Cuthbert's alma maters, those of Old Melrose and Coldingham, in the morning I look out of my window and can see his other one at Lindisfarne just a little further away on a clear day. No Saxons here, nor have ever been (apart from in various invading armies of the High-late middle ages), the Danelaw being a buffer for wholescale Wessex-isation of the North. Brendandh (talk) 01:15, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Marquee Club, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West End (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Lyngurium (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Baltic


 * Priestly breastplate (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Luther

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merger
This is a heads up over a merger discussion that you have previously expressed an opinion see talk: market cross -- PBS (talk) 15:53, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013
Hello, I'm TJRC. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Landscape with the Fall of Icarus (disambiguation) that didn't seem very civil. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Note that this includes edit summaries, such as referring to another editor as a "well-meaning idiot". TJRC (talk) 21:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh shut up. I really can't be bothered to pursue this with a disambiguation robot, but please don't kid yourself that edits like these today are helping the project in any way. Quite the reverse. Johnbod (talk) 21:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, with an attitude and approach like that, I'm sure you'll go far. TJRC (talk) 21:37, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=565817104 your edit] to Plate armour may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:34, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
 * diffused around Europe, often by the movement of armourers; the Renaissance Greenwich armour was made by a royal workshop in London that had imported German craftsmen, though it soon
 * page 16] [http://books.google.com/books?id=8APyY3eIONcC&pg=PA78&dq=Tameshi+gusoku+  &hl=en&ei=xCYoTuPdIsOz0AHW0_C0Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&

Disambiguation link notification for July 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Crown jewels, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Armilla (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Lyngurium
Hi, I've reviewed your DYK nom at Template:Did you know nominations/Lyngurium; I'm ready to approve it if you could propose a slightly shortened hook. Thanks. DoctorKubla (talk) 10:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Lapidary (text)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:02, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Lyngurium
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:02, 27 July 2013 (UTC)