User talk:Johnbod/35

I wonder
I remember you working on WP:HISTRS some years ago, and I wonder if you've still got an interest in (bad) historical scholarship. The article in question is Female hysteria, and it appears (see hundreds of words on the talk page) that a popular claim (explicitly label as only a hypothesis by its originator) may have been more "appealing to the general public" (and writers of pop psych books) than "based on solid evidence". I think a quick look through Galen and the widow (no paywall) would give you an idea of the issues.

And my problem is: That paper, although a spectacularly detailed destruction of the evidence claimed for the hypothesis (e.g., documenting mistakes that range from failing to provide page numbers in citations, to turning a quoted text that says (exclusively) "a midwife" into a claim about "a [male] physician or midwife", to critical errors and omissions in the translation of ancient texts), is focused on the Roman era. The claim covers at least 17 centuries. I'd like to find sources that demonstrate the level of acceptance that the scholarly community has for this idea with respect to the medieval and Victorian eras. Do you have any suggestions? WhatamIdoing (talk) 10:28, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the joys of history - where people who insist on rigorous sourcing for medical claims are perfectly willing to take some non-historian's research as gospel. Why people think expert sources is something that science subjects must have but think any old newspaper article is a perfectly good history source, I will never ever understand. History is very much a discipline with its own rigorous research standards - but most folks (who will easily accept that a scientist's opinion on science topics is better than a non-scientist's opinion on those same subjects) seem to think anyone is qualified to opine on historical matters. This looks to have a start on debunking things, not just the hysteria story. These sorts of stories are much like the "medieval people believed the world was flat" or "Vikings wore horned helmets" stories that float about for my own field of study - medieval history. (Neither of those is true, btw). Ealdgyth - Talk 13:01, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Pity you just missed this. User:Zeromonk is WiR at the Wellcome Library and can probably help - tha's right up their street. Let me know how you get on. Johnbod (talk) 04:48, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the prod Johnbod! Helen King was actually at one of those sessions (& edited the Hysteria page). I have tweeted to her & Fern to see if they can help with suggesting some sources for other, later, periods in history too. Will ask around more generally too (this is such a good example why historians should edit wiki!). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeromonk (talk • contribs) 09:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Johnbod (talk) 18:45, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I never expected so much help from one note. Thanks, all of you.  It would be particularly helpful if any interested historians would try to cite Official Scholarly Sources™ whenever possible.  It helps non-experts (i.e., 99% of us) understand that this is real academic information.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:06, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Address Collection
Congratulations! You have more than 4 accepted articles in Wikipedia Asian Month! Please submit your mailing address (not the email) via this google form. This form is only accessed by me and your username will not distribute to the local community to send postcards. All personal data will be destroyed immediately after postcards are sent. Please contact your local organizers if you have any question. Best, Addis Wang, sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Brush pot
Hi Johnbod. I'm guessing that this brushpot is a modern copy (took me two years to realise that!)- the reign mark is weak, the staining is apparently characteristic of a modern fake, and the drawing of the scenes is also a bit weak compared to another brushpot I have. The blue is purer than the other pot. The base exhibits two shell-like fractures, but to me the material looks like stoneware (brown and gritty). It's Chinese in origin, but is it J-ware? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 17:53, 3 December 2016 (UTC)


 * It certainly looks like stoneware, which I don't think J does at all. Johnbod (talk) 05:36, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Tang dynasty tomb figures
— Maile (talk) 00:11, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
  "And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,   I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.  For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."  Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)  Ozzie10aaaa (talk)is wishing you a Merry Christmas. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

Johnbod, Happy Holidays/New Year!--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:22, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Doucai
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

RfC: Inclusion of predecessors and successors in officeholders' infoboxes
Hi, I'm writing to inform you that I've opened a new general Request for Comment concerning whether predecessors and successors should be included in the Infobox Officeholder template, further to my RfC concerning Michael Portillo specifically. The new RfC can be found here: Template_talk:Infobox_officeholder. Thanks, Specto73 (talk) 19:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Assyrian sculpture
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Guan ware
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Swatow ware at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in 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) 02:52, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * ??? had been done. Johnbod (talk) 15:37, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Mail from your favourite dinosaur
--RexxS (talk) 22:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Adoration of the Kings (Gerard David, London)
Hello! Your submission of Adoration of the Kings (Gerard David, London) 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! DaltonCastle (talk) 01:54, 19 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello. Your nomination looks great! The only problem is that the hook you used is at 209 characters, above the 200 character limit. DaltonCastle (talk) 01:55, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK Nomination of Carved Lacquerware
Hey Johnbod, thank you for your efficient and productive contribution on Carved lacquerware. Didn't know there are anybody who have interest in Chinese art, to be frank ;) I don't take credit of this work since I have only created this article. Best regard! --WWbread （Open Your Mouth?） 05:59, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! There have been a few of us editing over the years, and the views are often not bad. I have been doing a lot on the various types of ceramics, & wouldn't have done this if I hadn't seen your start. Johnbod (talk) 12:36, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Happy Holiday to you
Thank you for the Wiki-Christmas card!

I also (quite unintentionally) created an article with an Adoration of the Magi image recently: Santa María de Santa Cruz de la Serós. You will have to squint to see it in the middle left of the reredos (or click it a couple times). Srnec (talk) 00:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Carved lacquerware at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in 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) 03:26, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Huh?
Hey Johnbod, could you explain your use of rollback here? It's not clearly vandalism by any stretch of the imagination. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * In my book it's vandalism to casually and incorrectly change the meaning of the text for no reason. I said Asian & I & the source meant Asian. What did you think you were playing at? Johnbod (talk) 06:30, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Whoa, John. I didn't mean to offend you in any way. I was simply asking for an explanation in the edit summary next time, that's all. Best, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:47, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure - it's largely laziness on my part, to be sure. And it was rather early in the morning for me. Sorry to snap, Johnbod (talk) 07:54, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Adoration of the Kings


Hi, I moved your public domain image to the lead slot in Prep 4, Christmas Day. If you would like to crop it, please do so. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 00:30, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Many thanks - I've done a crop. Do people think it's better for DYK? I'm not sure. Johnbod (talk) 02:01, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * "People": I think the complete composition is more attractive, not only because there's Heaven in it (mentioned in a later hook that set). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:45, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Cizhou ware
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

ygm
ygm. Sorry to bother you. Lingzhi &diams; (talk) 15:09, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings
Merry Christmas from me! Thanks for your company during 2016. We have seen the percentage of articles on women rise from 15.5% to 16.77%. 20% is within our grasp and that's an increase of 11% over what we first found. Your stunning articles set a high standard - I enjoyed your work on Chinese salt glazes. Victuallers (talk) 15:50, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Season's greetings
Hi John, many thanks for the card, and Merry Christmas to you. Best wishes, SarahSV (talk) 00:45, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas 2016
  "And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,   I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.  For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."  Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)  Tito Dutta (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Tito Dutta (talk) 18:43, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
Happy Holidays text.png Hello Johnbod: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU  ( ✉ ) 18:47, 24 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Happy Christmas!


A very Happy Christmas and a restful Wikibreak!

Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:37, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Adoration of the Kings (David, London)
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Mantou kiln
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho


Doug Weller talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

Merry, merry!
From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:23, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Address Collection - 1st reminder
Hi there. At the moment we have not received your response on the address collection. Sorry for the inconvenience if you did submit the form before. If you still wish to receive the postcard from Wikipedia Asian Month, please submit your mailing address (not the email) via this google form. This form is only accessed by me and your username will not distribute to the local community to send postcards. All personal data will be destroyed immediately after postcards are sent. If you have problems of using the google form, you can use Email This User to send your address to my Email.

If you do not wish to share your personal information and do not want to receive the postcard, please let me know at my meta talk page so I will not keep sending reminders to you. Best, Addis Wang, sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:04, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Columba
Hi Johnbod, I just wanted to stop by and thank you in person (instead of pressing the thanks button), for moving the Saint Columba Altarpiece. I noticed that lowercase "a" when I last edited there but didn't have the energy to do anything about it. Was thrilled to see it fixed, so thanks for taking care of it. Hope all is well and you're enjoying the holidays. Happy New Year. Victoria (tk) 18:48, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal
Hello! Your submission of Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal 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! Yoninah (talk) 21:35, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

School of Paris
Hi Johnbod can you please comment on this: and here: ? Thanks...Modernist (talk) 01:17, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Raheem Kassam
Johnbod, this nomination has been moribund for over half a month. If you truly wish to pursue it now that the nominator is inactive, please do so, but if you don't, it's likely to be closed soon. The only recent edits seem to be adding in questionable sources that had been removed earlier, such as breitbart.com. Thank you for your attention here. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:27, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll let it go. Johnbod (talk) 15:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year
Hi Johnbod, I hope you have a very Happy and Healthy New Year,

Somehow whilst going on a spamming-spree you were missed so thought I'd come just without the sparkly crap lol,

Anyway have a great new year and enjoy the rest of your day (or the beginning of your day if you're in the UK :)), Cheers, – Davey 2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 01:06, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:01, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Ctesiphon
This part of your current revision of Ctesiphon is inaccurate: It became the capital of Persia during the Parthian empire During the Parthian period, the city became the capital of Parthia. From 250 BCE to about 226 CE, the civilization was known as Parthia to the outside world (e.g. to the Roman Empire, the Han Empire, and India). It was not called Persia until the Sasanian era. So I suggested using the term Iranian to refer to both Iranian dynasties collectively: It successively became the capital of the two Iranian empires; the Parthian and the Sasanian empire. Or alternatively: In about 58 BC, the capital of the Parthian Empire was established at Ctesiphon, and it remained the capital of the Sasanian Empire until the Muslim conquest of Persia in 651 AD. Would you be okay with an edit? Telementor (talk) 09:01, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Persia is still the normal term for this period, as previous and subsequent ones. Johnbod (talk) 16:12, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * But the first contact between Iran and China (and arguably Rome) occurred in the Parthian era. Parthia was the first, and the only term by which they referred to the major power in Iran during this period.
 * Under the Han dynasty Iran was called An-xi (= Arsacid; the name of the Parthian dynasty). It took ~470 years before they began calling it Po-ssu (i.e. 'Persia') for the first time.
 * Even if the Romans identified Parthia with Achaemenid Persia, they always used the term Parthia (Regnum Parthorum 'Parthian Kingdom'). For instance, Trajan and Septimius gained the title Parthicus for their campaigns against Iran.
 * I believe the same is true with India with whom they had commercial contacts. Telementor  (talk) 09:42, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * And the ancient Greeks? Anyway the important thing is what the bulk of RS in English do. Johnbod (talk) 15:22, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Ancient Greek writers did speak about Parthians as distinct from Persians. This includes Arrian in his Parthica. And also Plutarch who gives an account of the Parthian general Surena in his Crassus. And I am sure the ancient Greeks who were at war with the Parthians, the Seleucids, differentiated between Parthians and other Iranian tribes. Telementor  (talk) 11:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Jingdezhen ware
Hello! Your submission of Jingdezhen ware 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! Yoninah (talk) 22:16, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Sutton Hoo helmet
 Schwede 66  00:01, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 24,360 views, wow! Johnbod (talk) 14:56, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Concerning the page "Masterpiece"
I have left a comment on the talk page. Thanks, AndrewOne (talk) 05:07, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Jingdezhen porcelain
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Talkback
Yunshui 雲 水 09:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Talkback
Yunshui 雲 水 09:11, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

O'Keeffe question
I hope you don't mind another Georgia O'Keeffe question.

My strategy lately has been to create articles that cover a number of paintings in one article - so far based upon time period.

Now, I am thinking about an article about O'Keeffe's flower paintings, particularly the paintings from the mid-1920s (close-up, sexually suggestive, abstract, intense colors). And, then focus on some of the more notable paintings like Black Iris, Petunia No. 2, etc. But, I'm not sure what to name it and the title should somehow reflect the type of works.


 * Flower paintings (O'Keeffe)
 * Flowers by Georgia O'Keeffe
 * Abstract flower paintings by Georgia O'Keeffe
 * other?

Your insight will be much appreciated!— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 00:45, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * There are a lot of "series" articles for VvG, like Trees and Undergrowth (Van Gogh series). Take a look at the VvG template at the bottom of the articles - there are a variety of title styles. I'm not sure the OKs are described as a "series", are they? Picasso might be worth a look too. I don't know much about the OKs, but maybe Flower paintings of Georgia O'Keeffe - or is that not specific enough? Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 04:49, 18 January 2017 (UTC)


 * That's funny, I wrote a lot of the Van Gogh articles about groups of paintings and I think I used "(Van Gogh series)" if there was already an article with the group name. Based upon what you are saying I shouldn't have used "series" in most cases. And undergrowth should not be capitalized. I am wondering if I should leave it, or go about renaming the articles.


 * My brain sometimes gets a little stuck on choices, as it has with the name of the flower paintings - and I really appreciate your input. The flower paintings are described as a group of works - they are not described as a "series". Instead of "of", I think I have generally used "by". I like Flower paintings of Georgia O'Keeffe. Thanks!— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 13:43, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Again, it's not an area I'm very familiar with, but I think that at least some of the VG "series" are generally called that - Like Monet ones, which I could also have mentioned. I wasn't suggesting there was anything wrong with the VG titles - has anybody complained about them? Actually I think captitalized "U" is fine too - it would be in titles for individual works. I think either "of" or "by" are ok. I'm glad if this has helped! Johnbod (talk) 18:20, 18 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh, good. No, noone has complained about the titles. Thanks!— CaroleHenson &thinsp; (talk) 19:03, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Many thanks! Much appreciated. Johnbod (talk) 03:27, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Dragon kiln
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * That's the most enjoyable DYK I've read in yonks. Very fine work. Haploidavey (talk) 00:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! Johnbod (talk) 15:40, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Swatow ware
 Schwede 66  00:01, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Cavetto
 Schwede 66  00:01, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks
Just wanted to thank you for your clean up on my post. It did read a little half-arsed. Just recently became interested in celts today and wondered if I could help update/clean up the articles in this area. Any suggestions? Jonjonjohny (talk) 08:04, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Timoclea
Hello! Your submission of Timoclea 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! Yoninah (talk) 22:44, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Carved lacquerware
Hello! Your submission of Carved lacquerware 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! Andrew D. (talk) 19:20, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

RE: Concerned
Thank you for your message, Johnbod. The articles on major artists you see on my students' list are only for critiquing and minor editing (e.g. adding a reference). They will work on stub articles only for their actual adding-to-Wikipedia projects. And they will be closely monitored. Best ProfSG (talk) 05:01, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Coromandel lacquer
Materialscientist (talk) 00:30, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Antonio Fantuzzi
Hello! Your submission of Antonio Fantuzzi 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! Dahn (talk) 12:06, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Timoclea
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:26, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Giovanni Antonio da Brescia
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:38, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Giovanni Battista Palumba
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:59, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Art historian Rose Kerr
I noticed Rose Kerr (Chinese art) getting created and just as quickly deleted by as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". The Google cache version of the page is still around, and she appears to be an accomplished scholar probably worthy of an article. I was about to ask for it to get undeleted and moved to draft space, then realized that the author has already restarted it as at Draft:Rose Kerr Chinese Art Historian. I thought you might be interested in taking a look.

It can't be easy for a new user to navigate the narrow space between "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion" and "A7. No indication of importance" without falling victim to either one or the other. --Hegvald (talk) 14:13, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * , I felt the G11 was appropriate because the page was/is essentially a CV ("she's done this, she's done that, she's so awesome"). The lack of sources didn't help either. To be honest I'm glad that it got recreated (because I agree that she's most likely notable), but it definitely needs some more work before it's ready. Primefac (talk) 15:00, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * She's totally notable! But it should be Rose Kerr (art historian). Thanks for letting me know. Johnbod (talk) 16:21, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Once you'be got the article done you can use a hatnote in the Rose Kerr article. I reverted that article since disambiguation in the text  may lead to more confusion than it solves (with the exception when both have to be mentioned in the same article such as father and son with the same name); one uses hatnotes or disambiguation pages WP:D.--Erp (talk) 02:07, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * What nonsense! I reverted you back. Once RK 2 is up there should certainly be a disam page, & it can go. Johnbod (talk) 05:01, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It is not nonsense; once the Rose Kerr historian page is created then the hatnote can be added until then it will be confusing to most readers why a non-notable person as far as they can see (i.e., no wikipedia page) of the same name is being mentioned at all.  I've started a discussion on the Talk:Rose Kerr page. --Erp (talk) 05:42, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Benedetto Montagna
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Stonepaste
Hi, a colleague recently asked me to look at the "fritware" page after I told them that there was no such thing as fritware. Just so you know, on the "fritware" page I'd say that I am the most cited author. My research has shown that this material is not and does not include frit, and "fritware" is a term that seems to be used by people that don't understand technology. Any technologically-aware author uses the term "stonepaste", including Goffer who is cited several times in the first para even though it is a tertiary source. I was thinking of starting a page on stonepaste, but I see there used to be one and it was rolled under fritware by you.

RBJM (talk) 20:02, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * There's no use pretending the term "fritware" doesn't exist. As I'm sure you know, the literature is full of it, though I see the BM and others now prefer "stonepaste", though Grove it seems only partly so. I only acted on a "move request" that had been sitting for 2 years with no one opposing it. See Talk:Fritware "Merger" section. Since both pages said the two terms were alternatives for the same thing, this was correct - possibly it should have been merged in the other direction.  Here's the other one before merging.  I have only tidied the merge & made other small edits, & have never seen the main refs used. The original main editor (of Is-p) is no longer active, but others are. I will copy this to the article talk page, where more interested editors are likely to see it.  Is "Islamic stone-paste" the best title, do you think? Please answer at the other page. 04:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Limoges enamel
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Ouch....
Okay, Meindert Hobbema is just sad. Sad, sad, sad. Ouch. Wish I knew more about painting so I could help... Ealdgyth - Talk 17:35, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * See this, and the history. The version I've restored is the usual poor EB 1911-based mix. Paraphrasing the copyvio version would be a step forward; the sources are good & online. Most bios of this sort of Dutch painter are poor, though Jane23 does a lot on the basic bio info. I'm doing Pieter Bruegel the Elder at the moment - was really poor, with over 1k hits per day. I suppose Hobbema would an easy DYK at this point ..... Johnbod (talk) 17:53, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Antonio Fantuzzi
&mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 12:03, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Why are you deleting my contributions on the Pieter Bruegel article?
Why are you deleting my contributions on the Pieter Bruegel article? And at the same time stating things that are clearly not true? C.Gesualdo (talk) 17:48, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Because they're, wrong, unreferenced, and contradict all the sources? Which master of Dutch and Flemish Renaissance painting did you have in mind as being as equally significant? Johnbod (talk) 20:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * You state: '[the town Bruegel] does not fit any known place' and you're calling me 'wrong, unreferenced, and contradict all the sources'. You have got to be kidding me? 'Bruegel' is generally viewed as one of the two places (and the most probable one) where he was born. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. Then about the 'most important painter'. Apart from the fact that you can never make such a bold claim, I would say that Bosch is a far more important painter than Bruegel. Then your wrong translation: 'nearby Breda', it doesn't say 'nearby Breda' anywhere in Van Mander. Also your claim (again: without sources) that 'nothing at all is known of his family background'. This is clearly erroneous. In fact his family background clearly point to the town Bruegel in the Duchy of Brabant. If you want to edit things, at least know what you're talking about. C.Gesualdo (talk) 21:19, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, do you have any references on any of these points? Grove says: "According to van Mander, Bruegel was born in the village of Breughel near Breda; however, none of the three Flemish villages of that name is close to Breda. Probably van Mander’s statement is a biographer’s commonplace, and he assumed that Bruegel was of peasant origin because he painted peasants. There is, in fact, every reason to think that Pieter Bruegel was a townsman and a highly educated one, on friendly terms with the humanists of his time. Guicciardini, an Italian contemporary of Bruegel’s who lived in Antwerp, was probably more correct when he wrote that the artist came from Breda. Auner (1956) has also argued for Breda as his birthplace, adducing several historical references to support this view. In the register of the Antwerp Guild of St Luke, the painter’s name appears as ‘Brueghels’: the ‘s’ is a regular patronymic suffix in Dutch, whereas a place of origin would be indicated by ‘van’. It may be, however, that an ancestor of Bruegel’s was, after all, born in a village of the same name, which then became the family’s surname." Van Mader says (as quoted in my note "...den welcken is geboren niet wijt van Breda, op een Dorp geheeten Brueghel, welcks naem hy met hem ghedraghen heeft, en zijn naecomelinghen ghelaten."   My Dutch isn't as good as yours, I'm sure, but that looks like "near Breda" to me. I haven't seen B en Son mentioned in any of the many books I'm using at the moment.  Coming from Breda is not a "family background" - what did his father do? We don't know. Johnbod (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Let's just do this in one place! I'll copy to the article talk - no more here please. Johnbod (talk) 21:29, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Carved lacquer
Mifter (talk) 10:31, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Just had a read of this after seeing the DYK - nice article, really enjoyed it. Yunshui 雲 水 14:21, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Meindert Hobbema
Thanks so much for your fix - I saw it and was just flabbergasted. It was a good idea just to go back to the last good version of the page. I also just noticed this and now I am wondering what else this person has been up to? Seems like a trail of really dangerous editing strategies, up to and including clearing their talk page. Jane (talk) 09:25, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed! Also he did several big edits, followed by some small ones, so on the watchlist the last edit looked very minor. You'll see a section or three up here that it was Ealdgyth who brought it to my attention.  I was sure we'd had more than that in the past - I think I'd edited it at some point. Thanks anyway, and thanks for all your work, which I mentioned above! Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 12:37, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Ha ha, missed that, and thanks for the compliment. Yes I think I had noticed this Hobbema take-down somewhere around xmas time and was feeling too ill and shell-shocked to do anything about it. It didn't occur to me to just restore the page to a previous version, which of course makes good sense in the short term. Sigh. Hobbema definitely deserves some wikilove, but there are so many like these!!! I will just be happy if I can get them all straight on Wikidata with all of their paintings - that will make it much more fun to write about them, because the paintings will be all lined up for illustration purposes. Meanwhile, thanks to you too for plugging away at the sum of all art!! Jane (talk) 13:03, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Macedonia (ancient kingdom)
To the honorable Johnbod, most illustrious of sirs:

This is a formal request of your services of advisement and copy-editing with the article Macedonia (ancient kingdom), which I have recently nominated for Good Article status. Although you may be busy with other projects or concerns in real life, I would be most grateful and personally honored if you could look over this article a bit and provide your expertise, criticisms, or simply your general opinions about what may be lacking or which item(s) may have too much weight or focus. Please consider my offer and know that I hold you in the highest regard among the old guard of Wikipedians, good sir, of which we are now a dying breed and a dwindling few. To be honest, I should have sought your advice in the first place, but I felt compelled to move swiftly on this nomination, before another inevitable bout of nationalist POV edit warring between Greek and Macedonian users. You can see all about that on the talk page, if you so desire, but to sum things up so as not to waste your time, they're chiefly concerned with the wording of one sentence of the lead, whereas I'm concerned with the overall content of the article that I have rewritten and significantly expanded from its original state back in early January.

Whatever your decision, just know that you have my deepest respect regardless.

Yours most sincerely, Pericles of Athens Talk 13:53, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, soon. "chiefly concerned with the wording of one sentence of the lead" is always the way! Johnbod (talk) 14:05, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hurray! I'm thrilled by your response. Cheers. - Pericles of Athens  Talk 16:07, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

FAC review request
Hi Johnbod, I'm sort of getting the waterboarding treatment instead of a decent review of the text on Featured article candidates/Palais Rohan, Strasbourg/archive1, so I was wondering if you might read the article and give your opinion? That would be very kind - and knowledgeable, too. All the best, --Edelseider (talk) 14:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

The Sock strikes again
Check this out ...Modernist (talk) 23:45, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, please do...it's a case you're involved in. I'll consider this a notification. MereTechnicality   ⚙  00:52, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to Women in Red's Role Models editathon on Women Role Models
Please forward this invitation to all potentially interested contacts

African Art
I can see that you are highly decorated and active Wikipedian. I am wondering if you can explain to a newbie (who happens to have a background in academic libraries and in publishing) how it is that entire passages from another published worked can be used word for word in a Wikipedia article without some mention or citation of that work being list. Am I looking in the wrong place for the information that you mentioned about the editors?

Any help would be appreciated. --Librarianhelen (talk) 23:21, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Well you should be used to reading copyright statements and authorship details then. It is the NWE who is copying Wikipedia, not the other way round, as the statement at the bottom of their pages makes clear. This is perfectly legal under our licence, and pretty common. Johnbod (talk) 02:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you. My bad --Librarianhelen (talk) 15:10, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Changed death date René of Anjou
Thank you for your message on my (talk) page. I'd like to offer some explanation. I spotted the erroneous date of death as a result of a project I started last year. You can read about in this blog. Since starting it, I must have added about 2500 links to the Days of the year pages. However, another consequence of cross-referencing these pages with year pages and biographies is the staggering amount of discrepancies between them. And this is within the English wiki only. See here for an excerpt of the error results. Most errors occur in the Year-pages but sometimes the conclusion is that the date of birth/death in the bio is inaccurate. To reach that conclusion I always compare with other sources, preferably the wiki of the native country of the person in question. I must have corrected dozens of bio's this way the last few months (you can check my contributions). Because of this I noticed that only a minority of the bio's (English and other) use references regarding birth/death dates. That's why I did not feel it was necessary to always add a reference when correcting a birth/death date error. By the way: I stopped changing corresponding bio's in other wiki's (like the German and French ones). The reason is that wiki's use their own sources. An example is Boniface of Savoy (bishop); my changes got reverted on the German wiki; their Heiligenlexikon states July 14 1270 as the date of death whereas the handbook used by the author of the English wiki says July 18 1270. All this going back and forth between wiki's takes me more than several minutes and the effort is often futile. I'd rather focus on adding historical date-links to Days of the year pages. Regards, Mill 1 (talk) 23:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw some of that; useful work. But it doesn't change the fact that we need references, even if it takes longer. Do you know about Database reports/Living people on EN wiki who are dead on other wikis? Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
 * LOL. That's funny (and worrying)! Mill 1 (talk) 08:24, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Landscape with the Flight into Egypt (Bruegel)
Mifter (talk) 12:03, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Léon Davent
Mifter (talk) 12:01, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Nikkimaria (talk) 17:07, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I haven't! Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You ought to now. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Home Kidston
Johnbod, the QPQ has been submitted on this DYK, which I think is what you were waiting for to complete your review. Please return there when you can; if you'd prefer not to, I can always request a new reviewer. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:06, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Self-portraits by Rembrandt
Mifter (talk) 12:02, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited A Man with a Quilted Sleeve, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Knight of Malta. 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) 10:38, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Alexander the Great miniature
I think his line of argument is simply wrong. See Talk:Macedonia_(ancient_kingdom) for my response, which mentions the article on Muhammad, which you seem to have even commented on in the past in terms of its image use policy. Pericles of Athens Talk 13:47, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm also curious as to which images in the article you consider to be too small at present. Surely that's something that can be remedied right away and I'd like your input on the matter. Pericles of Athens  Talk 13:49, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Zingara
Hi Johnbod, there is actually very little room for doubt about the fact that The Tempest woman was seen as a Romani by Giorgione's contemporaries:. In Italy, the painting is actually also known as La Zingara e il Soldato (http://www.homolaicus.com/arte/tempesta.htm). I think the article is not very good! All the best, --Edelseider (talk) 14:35, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

PS: Of course, the "not very good" article I mean is The Tempest (Giorgione). Looking at the history, it has mostly been written by an author with few contributions in total and who has left Wikipedia a while ago:. It needs a lot of additional work. --Edelseider (talk) 14:47, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * No, most painting articles aren't. At least it's longer than 1.5 lines, unlike many. Johnbod (talk) 14:52, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I put my money where my mouth is: . Cheers, --Edelseider (talk) 12:14, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for A Man with a Quilted Sleeve
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Rest on the Flight into Egypt
Hello! Your submission of Rest on the Flight into Egypt 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! Edelseider (talk) 20:52, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Royal Society
The Royal Society is NOT the oldest by any means. Please see the talk before doing your changes. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.245.233.62 (talk) 06:36, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Man of Sorrows
Hi John, I would appreciate if you could check this "edit", in relationship to the sentence after. I have contradictory sources. Yes I realise the theological complexities and underlying political tides. Not sure how to sum up. Not an easy one, given how we know so little of the specifics of 1440s workshops.. Ceoil (talk) 08:58, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alexander Maximilian Seitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Finding of Moses. 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) 10:13, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Sacra conversazione
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

‎Wikiquote
I wonder if you have read any of the Architecture and Art related books under "The Mughals and their Contemporaries" of The New Cambridge History of India. If yes, Will you be able to start a new Wikiquote article on it? Some redlinks (there) which might interest you include: Vijaynagar, Mughal, Rajput, Deccan, Punjab, Maratha and other q:Category:States of India. Solomon7968 12:43, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Rest on the Flight into Egypt
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

What's your opinion?
Hi Johnbod, may I request that you look Talk:Church of Saint Thomas, Strasbourg? What would you do? All the best, Edelseider (talk) 16:02, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

On the medal in Botticelli painting
Hi I saw you reverted this. I think the sentence is problematic for a bunch of reasons. First, its speculative because it might be like a medal and that medal also might have been made by Donatello. I don't have access to the printed cite, but does it really talk about the medal in relationship to this painting, or is that a connection that editors have made for the purpose of the article? And then there's the issue of that random external link in the body of the text, which doesn't belong. And then there's the fact that the medal, which might be the model, is located at the V&A museum. That's pretty tangential to the article itself. Bangabandhu (talk) 01:57, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Nonsense, from beginning to end! Don't remove sourced material (from a very strong source) from a source you haven't seen, especially in areas you aren't familiar with. You don't seem to understand what the section says.  There's no "might be like a medal" - we have the medal and the cast, and they are alike. Johnbod (talk) 03:32, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * If it is the cast, then why qualify the language with "appears" and "possibly"? If it is designed by Donatello, it should clearly state as much. And how does the link fit with WP:EL? Bangabandhu (talk) 23:38, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't write it, & haven't seen Avery. Large numbers of artworks in this period have uncertain authors, especially things like designs for medals which were then cast by specialists. Johnbod (talk) 03:45, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Then what gives you assurance that Avery is being used accurately, especially when the rest of the para leads to a point that is at best tangential to the medal, and the painting? Bangabandhu (talk) 21:00, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:AGF, and the competence of the editor concerned. The question is, what on earth led you to think that just removing referenced material was a good idea? Johnbod (talk) 01:07, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Last Judgment (Michelangelo), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tympanum and Finding of Moses. 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) 10:43, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Further reading explanation
Hi John,

You seem to be unsure what the term "Further reading" means. You can see an example here Hyperlexia, amongst many examples on Wikipedia. Cheers Gryffindor (talk) 15:30, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You really are an idiot! See Manual_of_Style/Layout and learn from it!

"Contents: An optional bulleted list, usually alphabetized, of a reasonable number of publications that would help interested readers learn more about the article subject. Editors may include brief annotations. Publications listed in further reading are cited in the same citation style used by the rest of the article. The further reading section should not duplicate the content of the External links section, and should normally not duplicate the content of the References section, unless the References section is too long for a reader to use as part of a general reading list. This section is not intended as a repository for general references that were used to create the article content. Any links to external websites included under Further reading are subject to the guidelines described at Wikipedia:External links." You do NOT turn works cited as references into "Further reading". It is typical that the example you point me to has the sections in the wrong order! I shall of course revert trhis. Johnbod (talk) 16:01, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Can I do something for you?
Hello Johnbod, yes, I start with that honest question because I am once again about to ask for a favour. Gerda Arendt has now reviewed the FAC for Palais Rohan and she supports it. Would you have a look at the article, now that it has been thoroughly polished thanks to the input of three people already? I would be very thankful and indeed if you would like me to review one of your articles (Gerda and I had the same honest arrangement), just ring me up, so to speak. All the best − (art lovers of the world, unite!) − Edelseider (talk) 15:19, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)
Hello! Your submission of The Last Judgment (Michelangelo) 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! Yoninah (talk) 21:08, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Ping
You've got mail.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  19:48, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cappella Paolina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sala Regia. 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) 10:42, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Citation on ancient Greek art
I apologize for the fact that the citations I added to ancient Greek art were not in the correct format. I copied them directly from the article archaic smile. I would like to ask what the correct citation style is so that I will not make this mistake in the future. Citation consistency has long been a difficulty for me. As I understand it, Wikipedia is apparently supposed to use a citation style known as "Harvard style." I am totally unfamiliar with this style and have never used it before. I have seen many very different styles of citations used here during my time at Wikipedia and I am not sure which style is correct. For all the citations I have added myself that have not been copied from other articles, I have tried to use the citation templates, but even with these, I am still not sure if I am using them correctly or not. --Katolophyromai (talk) 21:50, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * There is no "correct" style at all, but styles are supposed to be consistent within an article. The great majority of 138 citations in the article use a very simple style with no templates; please follow that. But if a point is already referenced to two sources, there is generally no point in adding another, that neither of us have read.  Johnbod (talk) 03:17, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Mérode Altarpiece
Campbell's JSTOR article really picks apart the triptych (you added it about 8 years ago); he doesn't like that version at all. He is very funny in places...the "shadows and penumbras are everywhere, often annoyingly obtrusive and always irritatingly sharp and wanting in atmospheric quality". Wow. Ceoil (talk) 22:38, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7
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.


 * Ophelia (painting)
 * added a link pointing to Charles Dodgson


 * The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)
 * added a link pointing to Finding of Moses

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Helen King (police officer)
Johnbod, the nominator has submitted the QPQ that you mentioned was holding up passage of this nomination. Please return as soon as you can to complete your review. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:23, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Papal conclave, 1724 review
Just circling around on this (was reminded because I did just reviewed another DYK). If you could look it over again whenever you have time, it would be appreciated! TonyBallioni (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Dutch Golden Age painting
Good afternoon, I just noticed I have accidentally double-reverted in Dutch Golden Age painting. By no means it was intentional to start an edit war. However I did not quite get your comment. If it's the main article of a category, why would the article need to be in the grandfather category? Marcocapelle (talk) 18:34, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * See WP:EPON, which is not as clear as it used to be, or should be. It used to be that all eponymous main articles were automatically placed in categories where their eponymous cat was a sub-cat, which is as it should be. This is a problem with a lot of your editing. I think you massively overestimate how much readers are prepared to dig through several layers of sub-categories, or even notice they are there. Johnbod (talk) 19:47, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikimedian in Residence BoF at Wikimania 2017
Hello!

My name is David Alves (User:Horadrim~usurped), and I'm an Wikipedian in Residence at RIDC NeuroMat (User:Horadrim). I've reach your contact through the Wikimedian in residence page in Outreach. As you may know, Wikimania 2017 is coming! I am here because, as a fellow WiR, I believe this would be a great opportunity for us to share experiences, discuss difficulties and exchange solutions, creating a community among us capable of supporting in other projects that would benefit from residents. In that sense, I have submitted a proposal of a Birds of a Feather activity to Wikimania that you can check out here. I hope to count with your support in this project and would like to invite you to join us if you participate in Wikimania. In case of any doubts, please feel free to contact me, either in my talk pages or by e-mail at david.alvesoutlook.com.

Thank you very much! ‎Horadrim~usurped (talk) 00:33, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

St Cuthbert Gospel scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the St Cuthbert Gospel article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 30 April 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/April 30, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:43, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Gerda! Johnbod (talk) 14:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for today's "earliest surviving intact European book and one of the world’s most significant books"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:34, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Figurines
As I surmised, she's a student. I don't think the paper belongs, we wouldn't use it as a source. Doug Weller talk 05:30, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Pure Insights is an undergraduate journal. Doug Weller  talk 05:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I still think it is useful as a recent "plague on all their houses" survey of various theories. mr Bobby clearly hadn't read it, which with his command of English is perhaps not surprising. Also sources in English seem to be becoming a bit rare in these articles. I'll leave you to it but they should be sorted at some point. Johnbod (talk) 10:40, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You've also used it as a source. I really can't see an essay as a source. Doug Weller  talk 12:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * For the existence of lots of other theories, that is recent and fully available free. I can't actually source (yet) what Jill Cook told and showed me about holding them in the hand during childbirth. No doubt it's in her book. Johnbod (talk) 12:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vespasian Psalter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frontispiece. 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) 09:55, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

My DYK? Nomination
I have now responded to you here: Template:Did you know nominations/Urbanization in the German Empire. Futurist110 (talk) 20:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Revision undo on Bible
Unfortunately, I typoed the note I made when undoing your revision. I meant that Gutenberg was not the first book printed using movable print...Jikji was. In my opinion, "mass-produced" refers to the methodology used for printing, not to the number of editions printed, but that's open to interpretation. Just thought I should clarify since I messed up the note. Thanks. Jtrevor99 (talk) 17:35, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * "especially in the West, where the Gutenberg Bible was the first book printed using movable type." Is fine. Your opinion on the the meaning of "mass-produced" is not supported by dictionaries or usage (and a copy of a book is different from an edition). Cheers. Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, the dictionary does support my opinion. From Miriam-Webster: "to produce in quantity, usually by machinery". That is what I am saying: "mass-production" connotes methodology as much as it does quantity. The only issue is whether 200 copies is "in quantity". As the use of "in quantity" is itself qualitative, there is no way to establish whether 200 is sufficient. I posit that it is, because producing 200 copies at once would have been considered a massive quantity for the time, especially given prior copy processes.
 * That said, I admit I did miss "in the West" - not sure how. Therefore, while the original statement that used "mass-produced" was factually correct, so is your modified one, so I won't challenge it further. Jtrevor99 (talk) 20:32, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Article needed Significant expansion and clean up
Hi, my first edit as an account on this wiki was on the Fertility in art page. The article contains many possible orginally research. I tried to clean up the article to the best of my ability, but I do not know Information about this topic. The article claims the process of the birth of Aphrodite to be an example of fertility and that the Germanic goddess Eustre was surrounded by rabbits, none ofwhich does not provide any refs. I thought of notifiying an admin who has edited this page. Thanks Joshuart (talk) 12:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)