User talk:Schrauwers

Your submission at Articles for creation
 The Children of Peace, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:28, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Please don't sneakingly delete content without discussion.
In this diff here you wrote in the log that you reverted an edit, whereas in reality you reverted one edit and deleted a tag requesting a citation without discussion. I ~kindly ask you to please not do this anymore. Tpylkkö (talk) 20:05, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Informing you of ANI-report
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Tpylkkö (talk) 08:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

List of important publications in anthropology
Hi Schrauwers, it has been requested by Cnilep that List of important publications in anthropology be moved to Bibliography of anthropology. Your comments on this request are most welcome. Please see Talk:List of important publications in anthropology. And thanks again for your work on Economic anthropology. Would you be interested in adding a section on economic anthropology as part of the list of important publications in anthropology? Anthrophilos (talk) 22:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

About gift economy
Hi, I noticed that after I arranged the lead so that it has intext attribution INTEXT, you noticed that "some" was not actually referring to Parry, and added another reference. While previously my request for such attribution may have seemed over-pedantic, I hope that you would now be more inclined to understand why I requested such input. When, for example, a paragraph has a source mentioned in a statement in its beginning, and then makes some middle statements and finally has a last statement, and two sources are mentioned at first and at last, it then leaves the "stuff in the middle" orphaned in such a way that it is not necessarily clear to the uninitiated reader which source in the paragraph they come from. Instead of using a boring citation style where every sentence is considered a "proposition" or something that has to be exactly sourced, even when the source is the same, one can simply write in a style in which gives attribution to the sources. Also, it is better, in my opinion to avoid weasel words weasel like "some say", "most people believe" and so on altogether. I hope you have no hard feelings about some of the disputes, I am new here, you know. Tpylkkö (talk) 07:46, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Political Economy in anthropology, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages World system and Robert Manners (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) 13:46, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Explain
Hello, I'm 128.214.200.181. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Political Economy in anthropology because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Pleas always explain reverts you perform according to


 * Hello anonymous IP address from Helsinki 128.214.200.181. I note that you reverted the same edit as anonymous IP address from Helsinki 62.142.58.210 and anonymous IP address 88.114.154.216 below. I can't help but notice that even when a valid reason for the edit is provided, it is reverted.Schrauwers (talk) 17:49, 1 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, I ask you to not revert other people entries without explanation. Please do so in the future. You can do this by giving an edit summary, or you can use the talk page. Here you did neither: 62.142.58.210 (talk) 12:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Please always explain when you delete content.
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to gift economy, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.154.216 (talk) 16:49, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello anonymous IP address from Helsinki 88.114.154.216. I note that you reverted the same edit as anonymous IP address from Helsinki 62.142.58.210 below. I can't help but notice that even when a valid reason for the edit is provided, it is reverted.Schrauwers (talk) 17:49, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Please remember to explain removal of content
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at gift economy, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.142.58.210 (talk) 15:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello anonymous Helsinki IP address. I changed the wording to clarify that intellectual property rights is an example. As I wrote the sentence, and it was judged not clear, this does not constitute a disruptive edit, but an edit.Schrauwers (talk) 15:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, I was refering to undiscussed removal of content. Please be sure to give a reason when doing so. Thanks. 62.142.58.210 (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2013 (UTC)


 * There was no removal of content. I replaced "This is demonstrated" with "An example is the". The sources (3) are listed.Schrauwers (talk) 17:05, 1 March 2013 (UTC)


 * In this edit you remove content that was recently added but don not explain this in the discussion, nor the edit summary. Please do not do this anymore. 62.142.58.210 (talk) 12:16, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Not able to log on
Schrauwers, I am not able to log on from this computer with my account, perhaps because this computer is already used by some other wikipedian. Just to make things clear. Tpylkkö 88.114.154.216 (talk) 11:38, 3 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Now it works again. I was using a computer that is used by maybe hundreds of people, and this might be a part of the reason. I have no idea how Wikipedia deals with public computers like this. Tpylkkö (talk) 11:05, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Template:Anthropology
Hello, S. Please revert this if you disagree. Between you & CsDix, wow: -- great-looking sidebar already. My point was that shorter text lines provide permutations and combinations (other than alphabetic] for suggesting a narrative about the subject. Thx. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 20:19, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That was queek. I understand your immediate concerns, but could I just have a chance to consider your comments in more detail. It's more than just that sidebar that's at issue, but I think that it would help maintain the integrity of what there.   Thank you.
 * Oops. Too late. I've been in the heat of it before, so I know what it's like. Really this ought to be on Talk page of the sidebar of sidebar. Is it something that I could discuss with you, CsDix, et al. here or elsewhere after I've had a chance to consider your remarks? Thx. --TM 20:53, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * OK. A lot on your & CsDix's plate. Very sad. --Thomasmeeks (talk)

Kinship add on
Hey- thanks for your kinship side bar on the feminist anthropology page! It looks great. Only problem is I'm trained as a linguistic anthropologist and don't know terribly much about kinship (aside from Levi-Strauss, women are symbolic vehicles and not real human beings, etc.). I'd love it if you could work on the cultural anthropology section of the page regarding feminist kinship work! Also, if you're interested, and in the US, I'm organizing a workshop on writing women anthropologists into wikipedia at AAA this year - I'd love to have another wikipedian on the panel! Thebrycepeake (talk) 06:28, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Inalienable possessions, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kula (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) 19:17, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gift economy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dana (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) 02:02, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Manual of style
Hello. I have modified a number of templates you have created because their contents do not agree with the Wikipedia Manual of Style (i.e., MOS:AMP, WP:EGG and MOS:CAPS; confer http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AMedical_anthropology&diff=550805865&oldid=550793118). --Omnipaedista (talk) 13:39, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * All good.Schrauwers (talk) 13:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Please note this. Navigation templates are placed below the template messages. --Omnipaedista (talk) 13:28, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

April 2013
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Negara does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:07, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Negara: The Theatre State in Nineteenth-Century Bali, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Buginese and Javanese (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) 15:17, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Freethought, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Robert Owens and Equal Rights Party (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) 12:23, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Ritual
Just wanted to leave a note of appreciation for your efforts at Ritual. Too often, editors either avoid these basic but difficult topics, or dismantle them into content-fork fragments. What you're doing is really hard. Best wishes, Cynwolfe (talk) 18:57, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, the feedback is appreciated.Schrauwers (talk) 01:26, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sharon Temple, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Willson (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) 11:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ritual, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Catherine Bell (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) 10:50, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

August 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=568992586 your edit] to Family 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) 21:54, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * 4 – Famille et parenté (mars 1985), mis en ligne le 17 juillet 2005. Consulté le 15 juin 2007, terrain.revues.org

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Patriot War concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Patriot War, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 17:24, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Polygamy in fiction and popular culture
Hello, Schrauwers. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Polygamy in fiction and popular culture, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) edit the page
 * 2) remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 22:47, 25 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello, I actually agree this deserves speedy deletion. It was a section on the main polygamy page, and it made no sense to include fictional examples on an anthropology/sociology/history/religion page. Rather than blank the section I thought it might be best to give it a life of its own.Schrauwers (talk) 22:58, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kinship, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lineage (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) 09:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

polyandry
the souces brought don't discuss the issue, and as one of my sociology professors said "polyandry isn't a woman marrying multiple men, it's a multiple men married and subjugating one woman. Feminism is nice, but in descriptions of reality, we need to say it like it is. There should be a section there discussing this disconnect, but I have not the time to delve into it. 93.173.130.211 (talk) 08:19, 14 November 2013 (UTC)


 * The page is incomplete, and I will get back to it soon. The literature on the subject is largely anthropological, not sociological. Your professor clearly subscribed to the "universal subordination of women" thesis. However, as you say, we need to say it like it is. Cross-culturally, there are examples of polyandry where a woman marries two unrelated men. The source of women's subjection is not always through marriage - consider how it may be accomplished through siblingship instead in matrilineal societies with matrilocal residence.Schrauwers (talk) 14:13, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

marriage reversion..
What was the rationale for adding the unsourced addition to the definition of marriage back into the article? Nickmxp (talk) 17:14, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The addition is not unsourced. I would refer you to the lengthy section in the article on marriage law.Schrauwers (talk) 23:51, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

a quick search for the word contract in the marriage law section is only found in a quip about common law marriages... and it is also unsourced...Nickmxp (talk) 00:23, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Odd, I get 19 mentions of marriage contract in the article. The source mentions culture; the article social and ritual ties instead. There is much to quibble about other than the contractual nature of marriage.Schrauwers (talk) 03:49, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree, which is why I wondered about the reverting of my correction... to me there is just too many ors in the sentence in the first place... and the legal contract between two people just doesn't make grammatical sense.. I raised many points on the talk page with no response... so maybe you can explain the contractual nature of marriage... Nickmxp (talk) 12:10, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree the grammar is a mess, but not in the deletion for that reason. I did a major edit of the page months ago, trying to bring order to chaos, and was not focussed then on adding additional references (what there was requires a major edit in itself). I have let the page sit since that first effort to allow the frayed nerves of those who lived through my slash and burn edit to settle. It may be time for the addition of material on marriage contract as you ask. It might help if someone went through the whole article and made a list of all the inconsistencies on the talk page.Schrauwers (talk) 13:31, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

But why do you support the inclusion of material that's not in the source cited... surely it would seem reasonable to use the definition provided... the lack of calling it a contract in the source gives the impression of original research being added to the source.. also I believe there is a misunderstanding on the phrase contracting marriage... it do believe it is more in the context of like contracting the flu.. not a statement of an actual contract between two people.. that's is a demonstrably false understanding... which might be why it's not mentioned in the source... Nickmxp (talk) 15:14, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I have actually taught from Haviland for years, and the brief quotation given in the footnote is not all he has to say. Marriage is a legal contract - there are 21 legal rights and obligations in Canada  associated with signing that marriage register. While some might liken marriage to contracting a cold, the metaphor shouldn't be taken literally.Schrauwers (talk) 00:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Awesome then you have some experience ... could you explain how it is a contract ? Take Canada for example... you state there are 21 legal rights and obligations associated with signing that register... tommorow there could be 22... or 21.. or none, but still a general recognition... now my understanding of a contract is that it is an agreement... Signing a registar isn't an agreement... it's not functional as an agreement... given that over our life times.. our marrige will not change... (making it a status) but the rights and obligations do...also when you factor in divorce (another status) it makes it even more apparent that the register is not a contract....also there is the issue of marriage cerificates... which are by definition a statement of fact...proof that you were married by someone... I guess what I am failing to see here is how this is view in any sense as an agreement between two people...(throw common law marriage into the mix and I'm completly lost) could you please explain?Nickmxp (talk) 01:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

I guess my main hang up is that I'm failing to see the difference between say, having a child and getting married...both get issued certificates...both grant rights and obligations...both can be dissolved... yet marriage is considered a contract.. and parenting isn't... surely it would seem reasonable to note it properly as a legal/social status, rather than a contract... would it not? it would seem that globally it is the status which is recognized by both societies and governing institutes...it also makes a more reasonable explanation as to why laws regarding marriage are so obtuse, when looking at it in terms of acquiring a legal status rather than terms of what constitutes a legal agreement... cause generally the law makes no stipulations on what agreements must be made but rather on what conditions must be met... yet we seem to steer clear of the word status... why? I'm sorry if I'm bugging you but this is truly puzzling to me Nickmxp (talk) 01:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Patriot War concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Patriot War, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:40, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Owenism Article
Hello,

I'm getting in touch as I work at New Lanark World Heritage Site, a village and cotton mill run from 1800-1825 by Robert Owen before he moved to the US to found New Harmony. I was hoping you might consider editing the Owenism wiki page to include information about New Lanark? The name of New Lanark is synonymous with Owen and his social philosophy in matters such as progressive education, factory reform, humane working practices, international cooperation, and garden cities, which was to have a profound influence on social developments throughout the 19th century and beyond. Owenism, utopianism, philanthropy, cooperation, communitarianism, industrial capitalism, concepts of the sublime landscape, and models for modern conservation partnerships were all shaped at New Lanark. It really was the birth place and testing ground for the ideas that led to the development of all other Owenite Utopian communities.

I would make the edits myself but I don't know how and don't want to make a mess of it!

Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by E.g.w. (talk • contribs) 13:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Article upgrade assistance request (Pre-translation stage)
Seasons Greetings,

Hi, i obsrved you have supported article Cultural anthropology well enough. I am looking for support for a relatively new umbrella article on en-wikipedia named Ceremonial pole. At this stage, undersigned seeks your help specially to improve defenition and lead sections of the article.

Ceremonial pole is a human tradition since ancient times; either existed in past at some point of time, or still exists in some cultures across global continents from north to south & from east to west. Ceremonial poles are used to symbolize a variety of concepts in several different world cultures.

Through article Ceremonial pole we intend to take encyclopedic note of cultural aspects and festive celebrations and dances around Ceremonial pole as an umbrella article and want to have historical, mythological, anthropological aspects, reverence or worships wherever concerned as a small part.

While Ceremonial poles have a long past and strong presence but usually less discussed subject. Even before we seek translation of this article in global languages, we need to have more encyclopedic information/input about Ceremonial poles from all global cultures and languages. And we seek your assistance in the same.

Since other contributors to the article are insisting for reliable sources and Standard native english; If your contributions get deleted (for some reason like linguistics or may be your information is reliable but unfortunately dosent match expectations of other editors) , please do list the same on Talk:Ceremonial pole page so that other wikipedians may help improve by interlanguage collaborations, and/or some other language wikipedias may be interested in giving more importance to reliablity of information over other factors on their respective wikipedia.

This request is made to you since culture related topics may be of intrest to you.

Thanking you with warm regards

Mahitgar (talk) 08:40, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Upper Canada Rebellion
Template:Upper Canada Rebellion has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 18:25, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Upper Canada Reform Leaders
Template:Upper Canada Reform Leaders has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)