User talk:Srnec/Archive, 16 May 2013–14 March 2014

File:3 sons of Louis the German.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as: is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
 * File:3 sons of Louis the German.jpg

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20
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.


 * Robert of Milly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Knight Templar and Orgeval


 * Agali monastery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Berber


 * Alamanno da Costa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Nef


 * Santa Maria della Matina (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Commandery

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:27, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Iraq
See Talk:Kingdom_of_Iraq and User_talk:Greyshark09. Maybe i shouldn't be so unhappy about this, but i think i had a right to have been informed by Greyshark that our original discussion was being reopened. I think the result of your second RM is fine but people were not given all the information and the move has created a problem of overlapping articles as it has not been properly implemented. Oncenawhile (talk) 21:22, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hugh I of Oisy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oisy (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) 12:44, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

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


 * Landulf Junior (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Lodi, Trent and Roncaglia


 * Kingdom of Sardinia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Bourbon and Venetia


 * Sancho II of León and Castile (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Zamora

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:51, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Taxonomy (general)
You may be interested in a proposal to move Taxonomy (general) to Taxonomy. Discussion is at Talk:Taxonomy (general). Cnilep (talk) 07:04, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Entichius for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Entichius is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Entichius until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Constantine  ✍  09:46, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

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


 * Aymar de Lairon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Tyre and Casale


 * Juliana Grenier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Casale and In extremis


 * Walter II Grenier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Tyre and Casale


 * Herman (name) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Armando


 * Hugh Grenier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Casale


 * John of Caesarea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tyre


 * Timok Rebellion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Lukovo


 * Val di Crati (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Chamberlain


 * Walter III of Caesarea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tyre

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the "thank you" (and right back at you multiplied by a thousand for creating most of these articles in the first place), but, since I am usually not up to date with the latest wiki-gadgetry, how exactly did you do that? Constantine  ✍  22:14, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * After the "undo" option in the page history is a "thank" option. Do you not have it? I have twice clicked it by accident when I meant to undo somebody. You are the first person I intentionally thanked. Srnec (talk) 22:48, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I don't have it, must be something new in some add-on or the preferences. Thanks again, anyhow :-). Constantine  ✍  05:52, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Template:WW2InfoBox. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 02:59, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * So a user adding unsupported and unreferenced information is treated the same as the user reverting him? This has always been the stupid side of Wikipedia. Srnec (talk) 04:27, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Editwarring is editwarring. And why are you reverting the inclusion of Denmark which is hardly controversial?WHy are you demanding a citation for this piece of information when nothing els ein the template is cited?User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:39, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=561609844 your edit] to Chivalric romance may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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) 02:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * " Popular literature also drew on themes of romance, but with ironic, [[Satire|

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


 * Aimeric de Sarlat (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bourg


 * Alfonso Jordan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Denier


 * De laude Pampilone epistola (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Honorius


 * Duran Sartor de Paernas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Provençal


 * Folquet de Marselha (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Folio


 * Neo-chalcedonism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Nestorians


 * Raymond of Burgundy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Henry of Burgundy

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:54, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 25
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.


 * Ademar de Peiteus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Charterhouse


 * Carloman of Bavaria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Nordgau

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Osorio Martínez
Hello Srnec, I wanted to illustrate Osorio's article in es.wiki with the map of his tenencias, but I can't do it because the image is not in commons. Is there any other way I could use it? Many thanks, --Maragm (talk) 12:35, 28 June 2013 (UTC)


 * You could upload it to Commons or to Spanish WP. I myself don't have a Commons login and when I tried to do it at the Spanish Wiki, I realised I've forgotten my password (es:Usuario:Srnec) and I don't have the email address I was using back when I set that account up (so I can't reset my password!). I don't know the rules at Spanish WP, but I don't see why you couldn't upload it there.
 * While I have your attention, I created Vela Gutiérrez today after I found a draft of it saved off-wiki. It's years old and I no longer know what Yáñez Neira source I used. Can you tell from the citations what it was? Srnec (talk) 23:01, 28 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Firstly, thanks for the permission, I'll try to upload it myself and use it for the article in es.wiki. On Yánez-Neira, I can't find that reference but looked for all his work trying to match the page numbers you mention, but can’t figure which one it would be since the one that would sort of match, is an article on San Isidro de Dueñas but the corresponding pages are not the ones you quoted.
 * I found another article online by another author that could be used as a reference:




 * For example, the donation you quote (ref. 11) is mentioned in p. 359.


 * On Suero Menéndez who confirms charter, in: Un catalán en la corte de Alfonso VII: Comes Poncius de Cabreira by Ernesto Fernández-Xesta y Vázquez which is partly digitilised at p.71 it mentions that Suero was a son of Sancha Ponce from a second marriage to a count Menendo, who Salazar y Acha believes would have been Menendo González de Sousa who later married Teresa Alfonso de Meneses.   This Suero appears in 1177 in the Monastery of Santa María de Meira in Galicia with his half-siblings, Fernando and Juan, donating to their sister María half of their inheritance in Castrocalvón plus other properties in Hoceniego, Villalba, Villaverde, Villamide and Saint Tirso. This is also mentioned in the article above by Inés Calderón, p. 361, even though she doesn’t identify count Menendo, second husband of Sancha.


 * Sancha’s second marriage and son Suero are mentioned also in p. 114 where the author also mentions that Rodrigo and García would be Vela’s sons from a first marriage, and that the offspring with Sancha were Juan, Fernando, Pedrp, Ponce and María.


 * Also interesting, and I know I'm getting carried away, is Sancha's filiation since she was not the daughter of the Traba, but rather of Sancha Núñez. This can be confirmed in the charters of the Monastery of Santa María de Meira that I mentioned above, in a donation made in 1221 by Juan, Fernando and María Vélaz of some properties they had inherited from their grandmother Sancha Núñéz, also confirmed by a secondary source, the work, also mentioned above by Fernández-Xesta, p. 61. Sancha outlived her husband by quite a few years, at least until 1176.


 * If you need any of the scanned pages from the works that are not online, such as the work by Calleja Puerta on Suero Vermúdez, I can scan the pages and send them to you, as well as, if you don't have it, upload at Yousendit, Barton's Two Catalan Magnates..... Regards, --Maragm (talk) 07:20, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * PD: file already uploaded in commons: Map of Osorio Martinez's Tenencias — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maragm (talk • contribs) 08:54, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the tips. I'll let you know if I come across a reference to Calleja Puerta that you could help me with. Srnec (talk) 06:05, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

New project
Maybe I am just reinventing hot water, as they say in Italy, but since we seem to be, by far, the most active editors of everything toubadouric/Old Occitan, shouldn't we start a wikiproject? The material seems to be awfully disorganized as things are right now, and we could really use more oversight, classification and less generic categories. complainer (talk) 14:40, 29 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know about a WikiProject. Most of those seem to be dormant or in the process of going dormant, although I suppose some have done good for a short while (and a few do a whole lot of good). If it's mainly just the two of us, I'd suggest good old-fashioned collaboration. I think two things would be top priority: improving the article troubadour and improving the format of the (awful) list of troubadours and trobairitz, which I once tried but never finished because it's so long. Perhaps we need a footer template to organise the various articles on the language/dialects, genres/terms, troubadours/patrons. (Having just written that, it sounds like a good idea to me.) Srnec (talk) 06:05, 30 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree about the wikiprojects being generally inactive. Still, I think we should ask ourself the question: are they actually counterproductive? Personally, I see a project only as a way of organizing things; I completely agree, however, that if it is strictly only us two, it doesn't make any sense. Language is a sore point. While fundamentally all troubadours write in Lemozi (some of them actually stating so explicitly) and trying to classify them by the few dialectal expressions they use is thankless and harrowing work, the fact that a good 50% of articles confuse modern and old Occitan is galling. In particular, fundamentally all IPO translations of troubadouric expressions are into contemporary Occitan, which one can easily see by the [ɔ] -> [u] and [d] -> [ð] shifts, among other things. We haven't even decided whether we call it Old Occitan or Provençal.
 * As for the list, right now, it's just a non-updated version of the troubadour category. Were you thinking of some form of classification? complainer (talk) 13:21, 30 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Is there an appropriate WikiProject of which we could be a taskforce? Perhaps the medieval WikiProject?
 * As for the list, I was thinking of a table with information and pictures. Something like this, which I started but never finished.
 * By dialects I only meant to draw attention to the fact that Old Occitan had them and if we create a troubadour–Old Occitan supertopic we'd have to include those too. The IPO things bug me too, but since I am not familiar enough with the system I don't touch them. For the record, I use "(Old) Occitan" for the language always. I only use "Provençal" to mean "of Provence" or to refer to a specific dialect of Occitan. Same with Limousin, Gascon, Auvergnat, Languedocien, etc. I use them mainly to indicate where a troubadour came from, not what language he wrote in. Srnec (talk) 20:53, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Occitan dialects are a thorny subject, mostly because, in the XII century, they are, mostly, happily unattested (there are reconstructions, nonetheless); perhaps we should call a project/topic "troubadours" in order not to get into it. As for the language, I think we should be careful to consistently call it Old Occitan, or people will end up mixing it with everything up to modern Catalan (I've seen it happen). I'd go through all articles to check it but the problem is, with no project, we don't have an exhaustive list of articles:) Well, at least I should learn how to create a footer--it may not be the same as a project, but it works wonders. complainer (talk) 22:47, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Something like this is what I mean by a footer. Srnec (talk) 05:25, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * This looks like a great footer to me (we need to look it through again, though, there are, e.g., two maldits). The only doubt I have is whether we should start talking about manuscripts, but I fear we'd be opening a can of worms. As concerns language and dialects, I am trying to recruit User: Andrew Dalby, who is a linguist, a mediaevalist and has edited a number of troubadour articles in the past. There is also a main point: shouldn't we have Old Occitan literature? complainer (talk) 07:45, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm late in responding, but Yes, we do need an article on Old Occitan literature. Srnec (talk) 01:03, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I have been looking around; we have a troubadour article, which, although far from perfect or complete (not to mention, full of floatsam from the vidas and Edwardian sources) would cover most Old Occitan literature. The rest could, or could not, fit into Occitan literature; personally, I don't have enough material to justify a separate Old Occitan literature for the moment. Do you?
 * Do I have enough hard-copy sources to do the work? No. And that's why I won't start it, whether we need it or not. Do I have access to enough sources one way or another? Sure, but that's more work to write an article than I have time for. If the question is: does enough non-troubadour material exist for an article on Old Occitan literature in general to exist?, I think the answer is Yes. Old Occitan was used for enough different genres that it is not reasonably covered in its totality at the article troubadour, so Old Occitan literature is warranted. But can we actually write a worthy article? No use in creating a stub or something like a glorified dab page. Srnec (talk) 05:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * What I meant to ask was, is there enough material to have an article separate from both Occitan literature and troubadour. I'm actually a little in doubt as to when Occitan stops being Old; I have some material about baroque authors which I'm not sure how to place. complainer (talk) 10:53, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Modern Occitan, Catalan and French
At the moment, pretty much every term used in troubadour/Old Occitan poetry has a translation, and an IPO marking in modern Catalan and Occitan. Some articles have French translations too. My personal opinion is that we should eliminate French and Catalan: the original language and English are what is important on the English wikipedia; modern Occitan is perhaps trickier. Whatever we do, however, we must do consistently; since we are basically the only editors left, let's take the discussion here. My proposal:
 * French has to go, everywhere: enough people, especially in the Anglo-Saxon word, confuse Langue d'Oc with langue d'Oïl.
 * Catalan too, unless the subject also, and separately, applies to Catalan literature
 * Modern Occitan should stay, at least as an IPO, until a competent-enough editor can replace the IPO markings with the correct Old Oc pronounciation. For non-phonetic matters, the same policy as Catalan should apply.
 * I agree about the French. I think all IPO marking that are not Old Occitan should go. Srnec (talk) 05:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It's radical, but I am not opposed to it. However, while French obviously comes from old, francophile sources, the Modern Occitan and Catalan IPO markings seem to come from extremely consistent and zealous editors. I fear an edit war if we don't have this policy somewhere accessible. Well, let's be bold and implement anyway. complainer (talk) 10:37, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Coblas and Tornada
We have separate articles defining these two terms. Unfortunately, "cobla" is just the Old Oc term for "stanza", and "tornada" is just the Old Oc term for "envoi"; having them as separate articles is confusing: by the same token, we'd have an article called sonetto when we talk about Italian sonnets. My proposal: Incidentally, this kind of issus is why I think we could use a project: if someone wants to edit the articles in the future, I can hardly see them digging the consensus out of your talk page archives:) complainer (talk) 07:48, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * tornada to be either speedily deleted or turned into a redirect to envoi, with minor modifications to the latter to reflect common Old Occitan trends in using envois (one could call it a merger).
 * cobla to be renamed cobla esparsa, which is a valid and very common (15% of all troubadour output) form.


 * I would support moving cobla to cobla esparsa. Srnec (talk) 05:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Done; we have to remember to place the whole, valid and relevant discussion about coblas capifinidas, continuadas, etc., somewhere else, I'd say the canso article. Any idea what we do with "tornada"? Should we put it up for deletion? I personally think the presence of this kind of articles (i.e., articles whose title is just the translation of another, existing one) is deleterious to any encyclopedia. complainer (talk) 10:50, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Footnote
Please forgive me, Srnec and complainer, for not responding before now to the invitation on my talk page. You have my very best wishes -- and I'm sure your collaboration will be fruitful -- but for the moment I don't think I have time to contribute much. Sorry. Andrew Dalby 11:46, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand, and have started correcting the IPA markings myself, probably with horrific results:) complainer (talk) 20:38, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Entichius for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Entichius is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Entichius & until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Constantine  ✍  08:04, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vela Gutiérrez, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Gema and Folio (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) 13:19, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Gil Carrillo de Albornoz
Hi mate! Nice work on the disambig/moves/rearrangement for Gil Álvarez Carrillo de Albornoz. What do you think of turning the title Gil Carrillo de Albornoz into a proper disambiguation rather than simply changing the redirect from one to the other (given both could be reasonably expected to be searched for under that title)? I've turned it into a disambig and thought I should check what you think. Cheers, Stalwart 111  01:53, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I would leave it as a redirect per WP:TWODABS: "If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, and one is the primary topic, then a disambiguation page is not needed." There may be more Gil de Albornoz out there, but we don't have articles on them yet and they might not be notable. I would say that the 14th-century cardinal is the more notable one and the primary topic. The hatnote at his article should suffice to get readers where they want to go. Srnec (talk) 02:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's fair enough, but I think we're talking about two long-dead Spanish cardinals, each of whom had their own relative importance. Trying to subjectively judge which is the "more notable" of the two and thus the "primary topic" might get us into trouble. There's probably more written material about the latter, but only because written correspondence and records were more common in his time. That's not necessarily a function of his being more notable than the former. I think the disambig might be helpful and stuff the rules if it helps people find things more easily, but I'm really not really fussed either way. Feel free to change as you see fit - happy hunting! Stalwart 111  02:41, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 9
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.


 * Chansonnier (singer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Claude Gauthier


 * Olavo Redig de Campos (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to University of Rome

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi
Thanks for recent edits. This not is more a reminder to myself that at some point editors interested in Spain need to improve Manual of Style/Spain & Spanish-related articles and get it approved at RfC like WP:FRMOS already is. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Zoticus of Otrous


The article Zoticus of Otrous has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable (unlike Zoticus of Comana) - not a bishop, and only a passing reference in Eusebius.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. StAnselm (talk) 22:11, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Henry of Castile the Senator, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cote and Arcos (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) 11:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:29, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Moving Kingdom of Italy (medieval)
You recently boldly moved Kingdom of Italy (medieval) to Kingdom of Italy (imperial) (on July 5) although the outcome of the most recent move discussion (20 June, 2008) was to move back to Kingdom of Italy (medieval), and then after the article was moved back (yesterday), you promptly moved it again (today). This is clearly not a non-controversial move and requires discussion. Please self-revert your most recent move and open a move request to allow community consensus to be reached. Self-reverting is not admitting any wrongdoing, it's just respecting the process. Wilhelm Meis (&#9742; Diskuss &#124; &#x270D; Beiträge) 18:21, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pridi Banomyong, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Statesman (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) 13:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:05, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 6
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.


 * Arduin of Ivrea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Rivarolo


 * Warmund (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Nones

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Imperial-Royal Landwehr
Hi Srnec. Could you explain the logic for moving this to Imperial and Royal Landwehr at the talk page. There was a very clear distinction between k.u.k ("Imperial and Royal") which referred to the domain of the Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary (i.e. the whole Austro-Hungarian Empire) and k.-k. ("Imperial-Royal") which only referred to the western half of the empire i.e. Cisleithania of which the sovereign was Emperor of Austria and King of Bohemia. This is an important historical and legal distinction. The k.k.Landwehr only defended Cisleithania; the Kingdom of Hungary had its own territorial force, the Royal Hungarian Honved, Whilst using k.u.k. instead of k.-k. is a common error in German, we should surely not be perpetuating this in English. Bermicourt (talk) 19:17, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Flavigny Abbey, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Beaulieu and Semur (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) 11:05, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

English language place names
I see you have recently removed an edit of mine, reinstating a different name. See my reply to Jeppiz's comment on my talk page to see why this sort of rectification of names matters. PMLawrence (talk) 23:45, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 16:58, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Composite monarchy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Poland–Lithuania (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) 11:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:53, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:HGM Poosch BrentaGruppe 1917.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:HGM Poosch BrentaGruppe 1917.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:37, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

About the Patriarchate of Aquileia article
I noticed that you have renamed the Patriarchate of Aquileia (state) article to Patria del Friuli. This is a significant change to the article and frankly I don't think it's a good one. English speakers are familiar with the term Patriarchate of Aquileia and not with Patria del Friuli, there are a number of other articles on medieval Ecclesiastical states that are termed "Patriarchate of..." or "Bishopric of..." etc, so I really don't see any reason to use an Italian name for the state rather then an English one. I think the name of the article should be reverted to "Patriarchate of Aquileia (state)". --Hibernian (talk) 10:49, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


 * English speakers are indeed familiar with "Patriarchate of Aquileia", but that is because it refers primarily to something else (our "Patriarchate of Aquileia (episcopal)"). The subject of the article is what is commonly called, even in English, the Patria del Friuli, although it has other names as well. The patriarchate of Aquileia was never a state, except in the informal usage (jargon) of some historians. That's fine, but I think we do our readers a disservice by that kind of imprecision. For example, the patriarchate and the patriarchal state did not have the same borders (not even close), nor the same start and end dates (again, not even close). Srnec (talk) 01:00, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=574685277 your edit] to Abbo 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) 02:14, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Abbo' Abbon  may refer to:

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=574685485 your edit] to Hugh of Vermandois (bishop) 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) 02:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * had been made bishop at the age of five, which makes him one of the youngest bishops ever. Abbo, bishop of Soissons, administered the spiritual affairs of the

Disambiguation link notification for September 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carloman, son of Charles the Bald, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Senlis (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) 11:42, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 6
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.


 * Wiliesind (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Basque


 * Wulfar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Denier

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
LukeSurlt c 15:04, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gozbald, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Agapitus (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) 11:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 20
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.


 * Domingo d'Yriarte (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Marqués


 * Roman Catholic Diocese of Orléans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Anianus

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:37, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Council of the Seven Provinces, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Honorius and Agricola (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) 11:40, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

On Alfonso V's death
Hello Srnec, I uploaded pp 223-226 of del Pozo's work on Alfonso V and Vermudo III. You can download them at this site in case you want to add something with regards to the discrepancies. Regards, --Maragm (talk) 07:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I see that "M" meant May, not March. Srnec (talk) 04:15, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ralph of Domfront, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Domfront (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) 09:13, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arnulf (bishop of Vic), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Córdoba (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) 09:19, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bubo, Duke of the Frisians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Triumph (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) 09:08, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Recent moves
Hello Smerc, I see that you've been reverting several "moves" that were not based on consensus, with which I totally agree (that is, your actions). I'm going to reference and expand the article on Diego Fernández which I see has been moved and does not cite any references, but in this case, I don't agree with the name. In my sources, he is mentioned as most likely coming from Castile and I don't see anything wrong with calling him Diego Fernández. I generally don't like to get involved in these nationalistic (Spain vs. Portugal) battles, but as you know, many of these characters were originally from Galicia or from other parts of the Kingdom of León, and are not necessarily Portuguese even if thir "curriculim vitae" developed in the county of Portugal. I've gone over Hermenegildo González and added references. Maybe you can also convince Cristiano to check first and reach a consensus before changing names or moving already existing articles and, most importantly, to provide sources and references for any additions or changes. Regards, --Maragm (talk) 10:02, 30 November 2013 (UTC)


 * When you are done expanding Diogo Fernandes (count), then move it to Diego Fernández (count). I don't think it needs to be treated as controversial, but we can mention the Portuguese version of the name in the article. Since Diego was neither Spanish nor Portuguese in a modern sense, and obviously spoke neither (modern) language, we are free to use either name. The choice, in my opinion, ought to be determined by (i) what most sources prefer, (ii) what is most recognisable to a reader (generally Spanish), and (iii) what makes the most sense in context (if every other figure mentioned in the article has a Portuguese name, go with Portuguese). Happy editing! Srnec (talk) 23:26, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Decided to leave it as it is and create a re-direction. Spelling depends on whether sources are Spanish or Portuguese. It would be a welcomed change to see that other users, instead of limiting their editing to moving articles, would start to reference and expand now that so many good refs are available online, but that's maybe wishful thinking. best regards, --Maragm (talk) 08:56, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pilgrim (archbishop of Cologne), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kamba (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) 11:15, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * I hope that's a Nørrebro. :-) Srnec (talk) 17:36, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I can't but compliment you on your taste; cheers! Now, I've been checking up on Ethiopia, and I think you're right there is a certain merit in including them. In particular if one is an adherent of the "early start" view of WWII, counting the Abyssinian, Spanish, and (especially) the Sino-Japanese wars as the entrées of a single meal, the Polish invasion being the start of the plat principal. A footnote would be a must, to explain that and also, as you pointed out, that it wasn't recognised as an ally until quite later (btw, its situation is quite parallel to that of Czechoslovakia); in the same way that a footnote should be there to clarify Denmark's ambiguous situation in 1940-43. Now, if I'd say I have a magic way of including both Ethiopia and Denmark, without removing any of the current states and without making the column longer, what would you say? walk victor falktalk 07:21, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd say you were going to use a collapsible list. I think that's a good idea. I want Ethiopia in because of this and because it was a signatory of the UN Declaration by July 1942, long before Denmark was recognised. I am not a proponent of the "early start" view. Srnec (talk) 20:10, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No, not collapsible lists. But what do you think of this ? Is it your feeling that we are edit-warring? walk victor falktalk 22:45, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 12
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.


 * Waiofar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Auvergne, Saintes, Bordelais and Annales Laurissenses


 * Duchy of Gascony (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Gascon


 * Jordi d'Ornós (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Catalans


 * Strasbourg Bishops' War (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Oberkirch

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIII, December 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 19
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.


 * Wenilo (archbishop of Sens) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Jouy and Attigny


 * Audradus Modicus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Saint Julian


 * History of Corsica (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Maritime Powers

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Wenilo (archbishop of Sens)
 Harrias  talk 13:48, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Manfred I Lancia
My apologies, but I have been finding some definite problems with the above article, which you created four or five years ago - ones which I seem unable to solve, except by what amounts to original research. I am hoping that you would still have your sources available, and be able to do better than I can.

For example, in the Career section, you wrote (and the article still says), "He inherited part of the city of Loreto, between Tanaso and Belbo" (though the current mistaken link to Loreto, Marche seems to have been someone else's attempt to improve your original). So far as I can see, this should actually say, "He inherited part of the county of Loreto, between the rivers Tanaro and Belbo" (my emphases), which I believe would agree with the current Italian Wikipedia version - "Ereditò parte del Contado di Loreto, tra Tanaro e Belbo" - which, however, was originally translated from this English version.

There are some apparent similar problems in other parts of the article, where the current version of the Italian article (through the distorting lens of my extremely limited knowledge of Italian) again seems to read more plausibly than the English - but since the Italian editors have not cited sources for their changes, it makes them impossible to use here.

If you can help out at all with this, it would be useful. PWilkinson (talk) 17:55, 22 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The problems were extensive. I'm not sure why it was so wrong. My Italian is not perfect, but I am shocked if it was that bad five years ago. I did originally make this article from notes taken in the library out of a hard copy of the DBI, which is now available online for free here. I have always been a terrible note-taker. I have just gone over it completely (save the troubadour section), but there is a bit more that could be added. I'll get to it soon. Srnec (talk) 02:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 26
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.


 * Ottone del Carretto (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Pareto, Santo Stefano, Rocchetta, Syracuse, Manzano and Montechiaro


 * Alamanikon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Alexios III


 * Matthias Corvinus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Kingdom of Croatia


 * Theobald of Langres (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Scholastic

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Aragonese Crusade.PNG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:Arias.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:14, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

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


 * Anscar of Spoleto (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Adda


 * Odo III of Beauvais (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Saint-Symphorien


 * Odo I of Beauvais (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Weland


 * Robert (bishop of Le Mans) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bonneuil


 * Sarlio of Spoleto (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Sabina


 * Second Balkan War (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Mahmud Pasha


 * Synod of Jaca (1063) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Montearagón

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=588820510 your edit] to Giselbert II of Bergamo 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) 15:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC) Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=592381438 your edit] to Florin 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].
 * known to historians as the Giselbertiners (or Giselbertini). He is first documented as count of Bergamo in 961 (although he probably had held the position for some time before this).
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:42, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * s Reichsgulden.

Proposed deletion of Carl Orff's O Fortuna in popular culture


The article Carl Orff's O Fortuna in popular culture has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Inadequate sourcing. IMDB, YouTube et al. are not RS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  12:43, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Louis, King of Sicily, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Castrogiovanni, Trinacria and Castronovo (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) 09:10, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Latin Europe
Could you direct me to the section regarding the map in Latin Europe's talk page? Afro- Eurasian  (talk)  22:47, 10 January 2014 (UTC)


 * See Talk:Latin Europe/Archive 1, sections #Map of Latin Europe and #Map. If you look at the unarchived threads you'll see that there has been a dispute about whether the concept of Latin Europe is distinct from that of Romance-speaking Europe. The map you added back is essentially a map of Romance-speaking Europe. But if that's all Latin Europe is, then why don't we just redirect it to that article? Answer: because we have and it has been extensively disputed by User:Dahn. In short, we can't have a map because we (and sources) cannot agree as to what Latin Europe is. Srnec (talk) 22:56, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, thank you. From my understanding, Latin Europe is culturally defined, whereas Romance-speaking Europe is linguistically defined. Perhaps we can redirect Latin Europe to Romance-speaking Europe, and add a section to Romance-speaking Europe in regards nations that are ethnically Latin? In regards to Dahn, I'm not sure what his position is. I've been fixing an article (one that he used to edit, or should I say, vandalize) and noticed that he has a very anti-Romanian stance. Afro- Eurasian   (talk)  23:22, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I thought it was all about the Romanians. . . My opinion is at Talk:Latin Europe. The term "Latin Europe" is not a term of art, but its most consistent meaning is found in medieval studies, where it means "Roman Catholic Europe". I would not oppose redirecting the title. Srnec (talk) 00:03, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree, it should probably be redirected. Afro- Eurasian   (talk)  21:13, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Start a merge proposal on the talk page, and place a notice on both articles. Rob (talk | contribs) 15:05, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, I did. Afro- Eurasian   (talk)  17:52, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Yugoslavia
Dear Sir

Why do you think the Monarchy of Yugoslavia should not have its own article? What I think the List of heads of state of Yugoslavia should be like List of heads of state of South Africa?.Mr Hall of England (talk) 16:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * What are you talking about? Srnec (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

GIUDICATI
Hello Srnec ! I changed the word "Giudicati" because it is a modern italian word. I think that in English it is more appropriate to use the latin word, which was the official language in use in Sardinia in the middle ages along with sardinian. Italian was introduced in Sardinia only in 1760. So to use an Italian word seems to be unhistorical. Bye. Mauro (roburq)

Disambiguation link notification for January 16
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.


 * Battle of Marseille (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Roundup


 * Conrad II of Italy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Lodi


 * Henry IV, Duke of Carinthia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Neumarkt


 * Verden (state) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Frankish

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:13, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIV, January 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Chetniks
I noticed you have edited the article, Chetniks. After removing references and referenced information three times, user:User:2A00:C440:20:27E:248A:3A23:609F:A121 has initiated a discussion concerning the fictional and bias, of Sabrina Ramet's book, The Three Yugoslavias: State-Building and Legitimation, 1918–2005. I thought you might be interested in this issue. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:18, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Re: Lu rebellamentu di Sichilia
Do you have a copy of Geanakoplos" Emperor Michael Palaeologus and the West, 1258–1282 at hand? Because I do at the moment, & he makes no such statement on page 351 -- either in the main body or the footnotes. I looked hard for it too. The statement may true, but Geanakoplos is not the source for it, -- llywrch (talk) 01:39, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I do not. According to Google Books snippet view, in the footnotes on that page he says, "Two other later anonymous chronicles, Liber Jani de Procida et Palioloco, and Leggenda di messer Gianni di Procida ... which support the central role of Procida before the Vespers, are very probably based on the Rebellamentu, or possible all three may stem from a common source now lost." Is the page number incorrect? Srnec (talk) 02:09, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Now that you pointed out the passage, I was able to find it -- in footnote 53 on that page. (I spent a lot of time today trying to figure out how I missed those words. They do provide support for that statement.) So the citation should be to p. 351, n. 53. -- llywrch (talk) 05:34, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 23
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.


 * Archdiocese of Mopsuestia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Council of Constantinople


 * Conrad II of Italy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Imperial Diet


 * Ulrich I, Duke of Carinthia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Imperial diet

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

RE: Peter III of Aragon
it is a contemporary artefact, giving information about Peter's reign (w/ a caption) and about how he was seen by his subjects in his lifetime
 * The image not exist to give information about Peter's reign, only have to give us an visual representation of the person.
 * The portrait does not give us a visual representation of Peter's person. It's made-up. It could be anybody.

the coin does not mislead readers about the times of Peter III, as the portrait might
 * If you write that the portrait was painted after his death, the image does not mislead readers.
 * The image greets readers before they read the caption. Further, they might not understand that the portrait is not even an attempt to be accurate.

the silver coin on a white background is more striking than the somewhat garish portrait in low-resolution JPG format
 * That is a matter of personal taste. In my opinion, you revert an image that serves better to provide a visual representation of the person.
 * The resolution and its effect on the image (minor in the case of the coin, major in the case of the painting) is not a matter of personal taste.

it is far more likely that the limited detail of the coin is accurate (clean shaven and long-haired) than the greater detail of the imaginary portrait
 *  Peter III had a beard and dyed it. The scientists that opened his tomb three years ago confirmed it. See you
 * Doesn't alter my argument or how he wanted to be viewed by his subjects. (Like St Louis, perhaps?)

the later portrait is one of a series of nearly indistinguishable royal portraits from two centuries later, it gives us no information about Peter or his reign, its sole purpose was decorative
 * And the image of the coin could be of other king perfectly. It don't have any facial feature.
 * No, because it was made of Peter during his lifetime. It does have limited facial features.

--EeuHP (talk) 15:05, 27 January 2014 (UTC)


 * The portrait is just not relevant to a study of Peter at all. The coin is relevant in several ways. Your view of what lead images are for is too narrow. See WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE: "Images must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly and directly related to the article's topic. . . Images are primarily meant to inform readers by providing visual information. Consequently, images should look like what they are meant to illustrate, even if they are not provably authentic images." The coin is (a) relevant, since it is part of Peter's monetary reform, (b) provides visual information about Peter and his time/reign, (c) looks like what his subjects would have seen at the time on the coin, since it is contemporary. The portrait is irrelevant, being a minor artwork from a later age, and we have no reason to believe is looks anything like Peter. So it informs readers less and provides less visual information about its subject, a 13th-century king. There are many images at Commons that I would prefer over the portrait, but none so much as the coin. Srnec (talk) 16:39, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The image of "image" should not be relevant, simply provide a visual representation. And the picture does it better than the coin. And the coin appears in both versions, so the argument of the useful is no pertinent. By the way, when you can, answer the question on my talk page.--EeuHP (talk) 16:55, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * So it's more important that it be an inaccurate portrait not painted from life nor even close in time frame to the subject? You are really arguing that the lead image should be chosen on purely "prettiness" value? By a "visual representation" .. one assumes that accuracy of represenation is important. There is no way a portrait from 200 years after the subject died could be considered accurate. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It is not about prettiness, it is that a picture plays better the role of "image" than a coin. Does the image of a medieval coin has to be more accurate than a picture only because it was carved during the life of the king? Compare the face of the currency and the picture with the real face of Peter III. In addition, there are others closer to the life of the monarch paintings. I wait the answer.--EeuHP (talk) 17:26, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If all the images are equally inaccurate and not from life, then chosing a contemporary image is better than chosing a non-accurate image that is further away in time. At least the coin image was how he was represented in life - Peter had nothing to do with a painting done 200 years after his death (or even 30 years after his death.. neither could possibly be accurate.) Ealdgyth - Talk 17:45, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The "role of image" that EeuHP has in mind appears to be satisfied by any image of royal man that we could find. Why would it even need to be of, or be labelled, Peter III? Srnec (talk) 03:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

--EeuHP (talk) 18:08, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 30
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.


 * Croat (coin) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Real (coin)


 * Otto I, Duke of Swabia and Bavaria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Pilsen

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Portuguese nobles/infantes
Hello Srnec, I'm trying to reference some articles on Portuguese nobles (most are without references and some genealogies are erroneous) and find that the titles of some of the articles are, in my opinion, incorrect. I see that there was some discussion some time back, but we still have some such as Infante Fernando, Lord of Serpa which I would move to, something like, Fernando of Portugal, Lord of Serpa. What would you suggest? Best regards--Maragm (talk) 10:41, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I would suggest dropping the honorifics: "Fernando, Lord of Serpa". The general form would be "Name, Title of Place". If the name has a toponym like "of Portugal", then use it, but if you wouldn't say "Fernando of Portugal" on its own, then don't use it. I don't know enough about medieval Portugal to speculate further on better potential names. I would say that community-wide consensus is against honorifics like "infante" and "prince" preceding given names. For medieval noblemen in particular, I think simpler is better, since longer titles give an impression of formality and standardisation that was usually not present (although I don't know much about Portugal, being non-lusolexic (!) and the English literature being rather meagre). Srnec (talk) 12:59, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks, bit by bit I'll start to reference some and if I see that they should be moved, I'll go ahead and do it. Just one more thing...should I translate the name, e.g. Fernando > Ferdinand, or leave it as it is? Many thanks. --Maragm (talk) 13:07, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Depends. If you are using mostly Portuguese sources and the English sources are few, then it makes sense to keep the Portuguese name, but if the person is an infante with a famous father whose name is anglicised here, then for consistency it makes more sense to anglicise. I leave it to you. (My personal preference is to anglicise where possible, to make the figure look less "foreign", since a medieval Portuguese infante is no more foreign to a modern English-speaker than a medieval English prince of Wales. This purely a personal preference. I do not anglicise Spanish figures with patronymics, thus "Pedro Fróilaz", not "Peter Froilaz".) Srnec (talk) 20:30, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I think in this case I'll leave it as Fernando and after I finish referencing it, I'll move it. I saw quite a few others with the same problem, especially some who were grandchildren of a monarch who shouldn't be called infantes. Lot's of work to be done with Portuguese royals and nobles, most of them unreferenced. Regards, --Maragm (talk) 20:50, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 90.132.40.49 (talk) 07:36, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Closed by me; this discussion belongs on the talk page, not ANI. 88.104.24.150 (talk) 20:07, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Diego Rodríguez Porcelos
Maybe you can convince the user adding info based on a personal gen website that that is not an acceptable source. Many thanks, --Maragm (talk) 18:52, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I'll keep my eye on it if he does it again. The article is on my watchlist. Srnec (talk) 23:40, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, he's back, also on Rodrigo of Castile. I've had enough fights today at es.wiki and can't handle any more today. Best regards,--Maragm (talk) 19:41, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 6
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.


 * Hakura system (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Freehold and Fiefs


 * Frothar (archbishop of Bordeaux) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Aquitanian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Effort to prosecute Ottoman war criminals, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paris Peace Conference (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) 09:08, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Bermudo vs. Vermudo
Ok, will do that. Since we have kings Bermudo I, II, III...I thought that that was the preferred spelling. Will create redirects from now on. Cheers, --Maragm (talk) 14:11, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello Srnec, re Suero Bermudes, son of Bermudo P. de T., I removed the title of count until I can confirm, even though López-Sangil does say that, but he could be confused with his namesake. Problem is the two volumes of Sobrado don't have an index and the charters are not in chronological order so I'll have to comb through to confirm his title. Regards, --Maragm (talk) 10:28, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar of Diligence

 * Thank you! Srnec (talk) 02:37, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20
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.


 * Treaty of Ribemont (1179) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Ormes, Philip of Flanders and Bitsch


 * Armistice of Versailles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Jura and Ferrières

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 21 February
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * On the Free-fire zone page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=596539539 your edit] caused a cite error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F596539539%7CFree-fire zone%5D%5D Ask for help])
 * False positive. Srnec (talk) 03:18, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:30, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 23 February
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 01:13, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * On the Weihai page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=596823034 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F596823034%7CWeihai%5D%5D Ask for help])

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. --EeuHP (talk) 21:20, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 27
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.


 * French cruiser Guichen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Brest


 * Oscheret (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Antiquity

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Kingdom of Sardinia
What parts of the talk page should I read since you reverted all my edits? AcidSnow (talk) 17:51, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I added a new section. But you could see "Merger proposal" above it. Basically all of the talk page and the archives relates to this dispute. You are free, of course, to re-open it. Srnec (talk) 18:43, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * If you have not noticed, I have responded to your reasons for reverting all my edits on the talkpage. AcidSnow (talk) 20:09, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Gómez Núñez
Hello Srnec, I'm going to be writing an article on this Gómez Núñez on es.wiki and also correct the one in pt.wiki but first I wanted to mention a couple of doubts that I have. I agree that he was not the son of Nuño Velázquez, as mentioned in Portuguese sources. I don't have Barton's book and even though some pages can be viewed in googlebook, page 256 is not one of them and I would appreciate if you could forward a copy of that page if you have the book. If he was the son of count Nuñó Menéndez, then we have an article for him already: Nuno Mendes (count), the one who was killed in 1071. However, unless he married more than once, his wife's name was Goncina, as mentioned in the article and the references used, not Sancha Viegas. What is the source for this Sancha? Does Barton mention that this Nuño Menéndez (Nuno Mendes) could be the father of Gómez and his brother Fernando? Many thanks for your help, --Maragm (talk) 13:30, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Since I have access to Barton electronically, I have temporarily copy/pasted a .txt version of page 256 into User:Srnec/Gomez Nunez. I formatted it a bit.
 * The source for Sancha is A. de Almeida Fernandes, "Guimarães, 24 de Junho de 1128", Revista de Guimarães 88 (1978): 5–145, which is available online here. I looked into it, but I can't do Portuguese well enough. Maybe you can figure out where Sanch comes from. Srnec (talk) 00:52, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for that. You can erase it since I already copied, pasted and saved. There's a blog where they copied and pasted part of Mattoso's   As famílias condais portucalenses dos séculos X e XI verbatim, without mentioning the source, but I have the printed book, A nobreza medieval portuguesa, a família e o poder which has a collection of various articles which includes the aforementioned (verbatim) on pp. 114-15, and this is where he mentions Goncinha as Nuño's wife with the source for this Goncinha being the Liber fiede sanctae Bracarensis eclesiae (Braga Cathedral). He also mentions Loba Nunes "Aureovelido" as his daughter and wife of Sisnando Davides. I will add this source to Nuno's article. Gómez Núñez had at least two other daughters, one of them is quite interesting, Chamoa Gómez, with an article on her will by Sotto Mayor Pizarro available online. I will read what Almeida has to say. Mattoso in an article in the book that I mentioned, says somewhere that Almeida is too nationalistic and tends to make all of these characters Portuguese when they were actually from Galicia.  Will get back when I make more progress untangling this. Best regards, --Maragm (talk) 07:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Looking at p. 34 of the PDF (the pedigree tree), article by Almeida, he has as part of the Celanova line (Nuño Velázquez) and following the Portuguese version of Gómez Nuñez's genealogy (making him a son of Nuño Velázquez and brother of Alfonso Núñez), he has Nuno (count) Velázquez married to Sancha Viegas, both of them the parents of Gómez Núñez. The mistake, I think, is twofold: Firstly, we agree that Gómez was not the son of Nuño Velázquez but possibly the son of count Nuño Menéndez; and secondly, Nuño Velázquez was married, not to Sancha Viegas, but to Fronilde Sánchez, daughter of count Sancho Ordóñez and Onecca Ovéquiz. So I think we can discard this Sancha Viegas as the mother of Gómez Núñez and his brother Fernando.--Maragm (talk) 08:14, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I have reworded the article, leaving mention of Sancha in and noting that Menéndez's wife was Goncinha. Please check that the source cited is correct, since I am combining your information and what I can read on that web page. If any source explicitly says that Goncinha was Gómez's mother, then we should reword again and say so explicitly, but I've left it saying that Sancha was nobody's wife and his probable father's wife was Goncinha. Srnec (talk) 13:09, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I corrected the year that the book that I have was published, plus the page number and added that she appears with him in 1071. I'll let you know if I find any source that mentions specifically that Goncina was the mother of Gómez & Fernando. Will go over Nuno's article now. Many thanks, --Maragm (talk) 13:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC) pd...I've added the source on the donation made by Nuño and Goncina in the article on Nuno Mendes (count). The source is the online article I have in the bibliography by Costa on the restoration of the diocesis of Braga in 1070, in case you want to add to the article on Gómez Núñez. Will also be adding that he could have been the father of Gómez and Fernando quoting Barton. --Maragm (talk) 14:49, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 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.


 * Fernando Yáñez (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Oliveira, Calatrava, Talavera and Zamora

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14
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.


 * Johann Georg Keyßler (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Nestor and Halle


 * Fernando Yáñez (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Sandi


 * German referendum, 1933 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Pfalz

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Catalan culture Challenge
Hello! I've seen that you are one of the main editors of the Abbot Oliba article and I just want to inform you that the article is featured at the the Catalan Culture Challenge, a Wikipedia editing contest in which victory will go to those who start and improve the greatest number of articles about 50 key figures of Catalan culture. It goes from March 16 to April 15. You can take part by creating or expanding articles on these people in your native language (or any other one you speak). It would be lovely to have you on board. :-) Amical Wikimedia --Kippelboy (talk) 07:14, 15 March 2014 (UTC)