User talk:MarcusBelben

Welcome MarcusBelben! Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are users!

Hello, MarcusBelben. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions! I'm AnomieBOT, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge. Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type  here on your talk page, and someone will try to help. Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes   at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp. The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun! To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Mypage/sandbox&action=edit&preload=Template:User_Sandbox/preload create your own private sandbox] for use any time. Perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put  on your userpage.

 Sincerely, AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:45, 13 December 2011 (UTC)   [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AnomieBOT&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Welcome_to_Wikipedia/user-talk_preload (Leave me a message)]

Español

Deutsch

Français

Italiano

עברית

Русский

日本語

Polski

فارسی

co-construction of learning review
My first wiki entry is an addition to existing co-construction. Any feedback, comments on my entry appreciated - thanks MarcusBelben (talk) 12:35, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I honestly cannot find much of anything to improve on. The material was all sourced to good, reliable sources (something that many people seem to think is optional, sadly), and the references were even formatted very nicely. Congratulations, and keep up the good work! Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:31, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Jago of Britain
Hey there Marcus,

I am sorry to criticize your recent edits on Jago of Britain, which I have (for now) undone. The Historia Regum Brittaniae is a largely pseudo-historiographical text where it touches on prehistory. These kings are purely legendary and have therefore not been treated as historical figures by modern scholarship. I know that Hoeh's paper is fairly recent, but it is also pretty far out there. I would not suggest it as a source for encyclopaedic information. Jago of Britain is a figure entirely of Geoffrey's design (as any other Cymric sources dealing with him have been lost, if they existed at all, which does not even mean that they would have been any more reliable as historical documents). The only information we possess on him is that short mention in the long list of kings that you will have read as well. Anything beyond that is simply information we do not have. The Jago son of Ennian you added to the article is a different character and would have to be mentioned in a separate article. In case you object to my objections, let me know here or on the article's talk page. Best, Trigaranus (talk) 23:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem - I agree Hoeh's views are far out, but represent a significant number of blogs, references, particularly refering to the bible (and Geoffrey's Historia) as historic documents. I expect most sources of British iron age history are unreliable, or at least open to interpretation. Could I suggest changing the emphasis rather than removing? 'Modern scholarship' would be pretty dull, unrepresentative, and ultimately inaccurate if it didn't include (and clearly identify and criticise) all views. The history of interpretation can be as important in analysis as the primary sources themselves in our understanding. As for Jago of Ennian, I was highlighting that 'Jago son of Ennian' has been, and can easily be confused with 'King Jago of Britain'.

Please have a look and add/edit a little more about Jago and Hoeh. I'm still a little new to wiki editing, but will try and find you on talk too.

Thanks Marcus

Speedy deletion nomination of Henry Gunter
Hello MarcusBelben,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Henry Gunter for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ironholds (talk) 20:31, 10 January 2014 (UTC)