User talk:Richard Keatinge/Archive 19

Punctuation errors
Hey Richard! The person that has recently made dozens of changes to Fall of WRE keeps making punctuation and grammar errors: comma errors, sentence fragments, and so on. I had originally told him about one comma rather than just fix it myself, but when I went back, I saw that it had not been fixed, so I went through that one paragraph - the Battle of Adrianople - and found a dozen errors. I don't think I can face the whole long article at that rate. Can you? Maybe we could split it? I would ask him, but it looks as though that one error was not an accidental error, and he honestly doesn't know the rules of correct punctuation and grammar. It's tedious I know, but it really makes us look like idiots imo if such simple aspects of composition aren't correct. Do you feel like going through and checking and fixing them? Helping? Giving me sympathy? :-) Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Definite sympathy! Is it this series of edits that you mean? Some good some not quite so good, IMHO. I may spend some time on them. Richard Keatinge (talk) 19:41, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
 * YES!! There are literally about 50 of them I think. Prose changes that aren't an improvement in many cases, punctuation errors, and some changes of content that I question. You, Richard my dear, always write good prose, your punctuation is always correct, and whatever content disagreements we may have are always fairly and readily resolved with good sources. One can not ask for more! I appreciate you. I consider you a friend because I respect your work and your general behavior. You are the epitome of good grace on WP!  I'm sure sometimes you wish I didn't think so, but there it is. Please do check as many edits as you can stand. If you get to where you can't take it anymore, ping me and I'll do what you think is left to do. (Ouch. I can't believe I said that. I hate correcting punctuation.) Good luck! Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:24, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
 * You totally rock dude! I may go for the highest number of thank you's ever given anyone! :-) Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:53, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Fall of empire
I see Pazuzu has been busy. :-) Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:27, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I like to consider positively even Pazuzu's suggestions. :-) More importantly, Ferrarini's paper is not of a quality that we should use here. Further discussion at your option. Richard Keatinge (talk) 19:53, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Being fair minded and all, of course, even Pazuzu deserves to be listened to - but not Ferrarini? I don't even know who that is, so if you don't like him, I don't like him either. Neither does Pazuzu. We have consensus. :-) Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:23, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 16
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spread of Christianity, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Main.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 24
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ordovices, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Agricola.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Review request
Hello dearheart! I am in the process of creating a new article titled 'Rise of Christianity in Roman Empire' and would like to ask you to take a critical look at it before publishing it if you would. Please be merciless! I thought of titling it something about Attractiveness because that's what it's really about but couldn't come up with a good title. Anyway, take a look if you have time please, I respect your opinions. Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:38, 14 October 2021 (UTC) Here: Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:08, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Richard Richard Richard please do come help! It needs copy editing as much as anything and I had a bad experience with one CE who kept changing meaning into errors in content, but I know you and what you do and I respect your knowledge base and skills. I love that you are biased in the opposite direction from me and are still always reasonable!! I won't pester you anymore, I promise, but I sure would like your input. Thank you no matter what! Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:17, 14 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Have I offended you? I apologize if so. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Definitely not! I have this deal with my partner: when either of us is making suggestions for the other's work, we are free to suggest anything we like, however outrageous, and the recipient is free to do anything with it, all the way from using it and taking all the credit to dismissing it entirely. The result seems to preserve domestic harmony and also produces good collaborative work. I hope that we can come to some similar modus operandi. Richard Keatinge (talk) 07:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes please! I love that! I won't take credit for your suggestions, but you are certainly free to do whatever you like with mine! Thank you Richard. Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:26, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I put your lead back. It was the best version, so thank you for that. I got in trouble for having some quotes in the draft that I wasn't done working with yet and have learned that draft space is not really draft space - at least that I completely misunderstood how draft space actually works. I had no idea it is published material even though it isn't published to main space yet, so this has been both discouraging and educational. You probably know all that already - but I didn't. Now I do. Bummer - and I have ended up not using most of the section anyway. Oy vey! Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:20, 24 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for all your efforts. Jenhawk777 (talk) 02:29, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

apology
I'm sorry for what went down on persecution of pagans. Is it possible to proceed as you suggested w/o him?

Also, I wanted you to know I did that merge of Decline and attractive appeal. It is now Christianization of the late Roman empire at another editor's suggestion. I tried for "Religion in..." but it was a no-go. Hope you're okay with that. Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:47, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Eskimo archery revert
May I ask why you reverted this edit of Eskimo archery? I think it should be obvious that this was an improvement (e.g., to link the first use of the term "bowyer" instead of the second one, and to not start that word and the word "cable" with an uppercase letter, to avoid assuming that bowyers must be male, and to change "jell" to "gel" as the more typical word choice). I wonder whether you realized that you were reverting two edits instead of one. —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 20:37, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Good points, let's discuss them on the talk page; I'll copy your remarks there. Richard Keatinge (talk) 20:52, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Walsh et al. 2017
Perhaps I'm being a bit dim here, but where exactly does Walsh et al. predict that two WHG skeletons with incomplete SNPs, La Braña and Cheddar Man, are predicted to have had dark/dark-to-black skin, with the latter also showing a possible intermediate skin colour range, whereas the other two WHG skeletons with complete SNPs, Sven and Loschbour man, are predicted to have had dark/intermediate and intermediate skin, respectively.? Tewdar (talk) 17:32, 26 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Oops, sorry. That part is from Brace et al. The way the paragraph is structured makes it look like the Walsh study is making this claim. Tewdar (talk) 17:46, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, if that's tripped you up it needs clarification, can you suggest a better form of words?

Still reading The Archaeology of Late Antique 'Paganism'?
So, I'm guessing you aren't. I saw your comment on the discussion for redirect of Decline of classical polytheism. When you told me you bought Lavan's book, I hoped for more open-mindedness from you. I am disappointed. Jenhawk777 (talk) 06:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You might as well just delete this. Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:59, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 8
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hell in Christianity, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Medician.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Edit War pending!
Hi Richard, you helped out a short while ago on Beekeeping in Ireland, a user referred to as 2A02:4F00:500:1C01:BC4D:ABBE:C9C9:E7AF  has just started to change a LOT on the page, started of with deletions which didn't make sense, including deleting Sources needed for other paragraphs in the Section, and now appears to be writing up New paragraphs.

This is what I have experienced in the past, on the page, only this seems much more concerted and methodical, I think one can safely guess which side they are batting for, if you get my meaning!

If you could just even say a "hello" on the Talk Page (I've started a New Section there for him to discuss his err issues), so that he knows that Wikipedia is a community thing and these types of one sided deletions and re-writes are not proper and need to be discussed.

I would really like to just Revert the lot of them and say in the Edit Summary "Ref: Talk", but I don't think that is really allowed, nor would it be in the keeping of the Wikipedia ethos!

Greatly appreciated my friend. Bibby (talk) 20:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 1
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited English longbow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gwent.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Cassandra
Thank you for greatly improving the clarity here. I have a lot of time for some, nay much, of Cassandra's writing that I have seen but this episode is hardly his finest hour nor that of journalism in general. Nor indeed poor old Liberace. Sheesh. What a mess. Thank G_d society has moved on a bit since then! Cheers DBaK (talk) 18:19, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks! Chaipau (talk) 10:45, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Notice of Fringe Theories Noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Fringe theories/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is section header of discussion. The discussion is about the topic Johann Dzierzon. Thank you. --Aserafin (talk) 13:18, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Help!
I am coming here and asking and not posting this discussion on the article talk page because you may not want to show up at all, and I don't want to put you on the spot publicly. In response to former complaints, I redid Christianization of the Roman Empire partly by removing all the material on what might have made it attractive to people of that period. Then I retitled it as Historiography of the Christianization of the Roman Empire because I thought the criticism that it was historiography was accurate. (It's all historiography!) Now another editor has added back in all the material I removed (after re-heading the section as "Grass roots" causes). And they have reverted the title back to the original one leaving out historiography altogether! Richard, you have the opposite personal pov than I have, but I believe you make the same kind of effort to be fair and unbiased that I do. I respect that. I covet that. Would you take a look at this poor benighted article and put in your two cents worth on what it needs or doesn't need? I am beside myself - besides working on another article at the same time! If you want to stay far away I understand. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:02, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm touched that you thought I might be useful in this context, and I'm sorry to disappoint you. For two reasons, one is that I'm even busier in real life than usual, and the other is that, out of respect for all your hard work, I've long planned to wait until the article has become quiescent before I suggest anything. I'd prefer not to wrangle about unclear issues, but I hope to offer a rethink in due course. Richard Keatinge (talk) 13:25, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Sigh. Of course you are useful! More than useful, you make valuable contributions, you sometimes even challenge me to see from another perspective what I think I have long known and understood. It's the best possible relationship on WP - someone you like and respect, who offers quality work - from a challenging POV. That's perfection! I know we have disagreed, but that doesn't mean I don't think highly of you! Disagreeing with me is not only allowed - sometimes it's encouraged. It often produces the best results.
 * But I totally understand about RL. This has been a difficult, crazy and busy year for me too. I've even been a little cranky because of it.
 * I was hoping you would maybe follow through with your long ago statement about adding some to martyrdom - it could use some of the material on how many fell away because of it. Anyway, the article has been sitting quietly for a long time and is now getting completely reorganized by Anywikiuser who is doing a fantastic job. I am of course biting my nails and obsessing, but mostly trying to stay out of their way. I'm not very good at that. But I'm trying.
 * Please take the best and most excellent care of yourself during this busy time, and come back to your friends on WP when you can. Please do count me among them.Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:31, 24 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Richard, I totally respect your decision, and I am not trying to argue here - just explaining my request. I fully intend to put this article back up for GA again, and I do not want you to come along and start picking it apart then - please pick it apart before then when it gives me a chance to respond and fix it. That way at least it gets something approaching a fair chance. Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:23, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll try to oblige. I'd just like to reassure you that I don't spend my Wikiminutes trying to work out how to make your life miserable :-) If I can find the personal and Wiki space to get a good run-up for a kick, I'll get my boots on. Richard Keatinge (Pazuzu) 21.56, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I love that you have a sense of humor. You will probably need it.  Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Copying licensed material requires attribution
Hi. I see in a recent addition to Kendrick's Cave you included material from a webpage that is available under a compatible Creative Commons Licence. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. It's also required under the terms of the license. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 13:13, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 21
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Alaboi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sessa.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Historiography of Christianization of the Roman Empire
On the third try it finally made GA!!! What is most helpful isn't always positive, and since I incorporated all your "criticisms" in the second rewrite, I feel that you markedly contributed to its eventual success. Thank you for being willing to read and comment. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:50, 29 December 2022 (UTC)