User talk:Tomaterols

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 06:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Re: Brand new and confused
That sounds like a plan. Once you get hang of the rather weird footnote syntax that MediaWiki uses, believe me, you're definitely well in your way learning how the formatting works - it's just about one of the weirdest ones. =) I took a small peek and you seemed to be doing well. Please do let me know when you're done and I'll look at what kind of advice I can give. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 06:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Feedback on the draft
I have to say this looks pretty good so far. The most obvious first suggestion would be that you should use the various citation templates such as and  for formatting the references - these help keep the citation styles uniform. As for using tons of references to a single work, that may look a little bit awkwark, but regrettably, that's just about the only way we can do specific references right now. Using non-inline sources (i.e. "just list the book in the references") would be, in my humble opinion, acceptable in very short articles - but since you've already put so much effort in citing them here, there's really no need to tear all that work down. Inline citations are far better in articles that are longer than a few paragraphs. You could, however, break it down to page-by-page citations: Just use etc in bibliography, and then use references in form of (I don't know the exact guidelines for these, but it's somewhere, because it seems to be quite widely used - I suppose there's a cite template for this too). I suppose this is what you were chasing here. The basic principle is, generally, that all relevant reference information is in the references themselves, and the page numbers should go in &lt;ref&gt; tags.

But I have to say that this version is progressing really well, and you may want to consider replacing the stub with this thing already...

Oh, and the tilde thing is in the toolbar - there's a signature button on it. =) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 15:31, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Clan MacIntyre update
see [old version of Clan MacIntyre with tags]. it was decided at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Clans of Scotland to delete the offending text. The text I've added is from a Victorian uncopyrighted source. Its use is to be a stub for future editing, so that the same mistake of copyright problems can not be repeated. Of course the source will have errors and be out of date. My hope is that others will correct the info (yourself, for instance), hopeful with references. Feel free to edit the changes you mentioned, but please use references, as I'll be watching the text for a few months to check copy violation issues. Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 18:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * no problem. Your reaction is actually reassuring to me. It means there are editors who care about the Clan MacIntyre article. Go ahead and edit. You mentioned various sources you had access to so you seem better equipped than I. The source I used is useful for the purpose, given the age of the book, I think it unlikely I have a stake. I used the same source with Clan Forbes when that article was deleted for copyright issues. Unfortunately for clan Forbes, nobody seemed to notice or care. I'm glade Clan MacIntyre will not go the same way. Always remember that no one editor owns an article. I know one becomes attached to various subjects. I'll keep an eye on your edits, and if I have misgivings, I'll contact you first before jumping in. Yours ever Czar Brodie (talk) 18:25, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I seem to have posted a reply on one of your draft talk pages (User talk:Tomaterols/Drafts). Sorry about that. Just delete after reading as they say. Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 00:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Moved From User:Tomaterols/Drafts
Looks good, very good judging from the list of references. The article needs linking and might be better organized into extra paragraphs ie Origins of the clan, and Meaning of the name and Clan lands etc.

one point: this information from page 298 of The Highland clans of Scotland; their history and traditions, vol II, looks like it might have some valid points, and would probably be good to mention its arguments (not in so many words):

"LIKE Gow, MacNair, and others, the name MacIntyre is one of the Highland cognomens derived from a handicraft. Its holder was " the son of a carpenter." Whether or not all holders of the name are derived from a single origin appears doubtful, though common tradition asserts that they are a branch of the great Clan Donald. A romantic story which accounts for the conferring of the name is of a Macdonald at sea alone in an open boat, who found his craft suddenly spring a dangerous leak. Being without other means to stop it he thrust his thumb into the hole, and as it was impossible to keep the thumb there and at the same time navigate the boat to land he cut the thumb off. For this drastic expedient he was ever afterwards named " the Carpenter." Such a story looks like a device of the Highlander to escape from the necessity of deriving his name from an actual handicraft, which was looked down upon as unbefitting the character of a gentle- man. Holders of the name, however, seem never to have taken the field under a single chief or leader, and from their appearance in widely separate parts of the country, there is room for the supposition that the name was derived not from one but from many individuals who each in his own district, were actual workers in wood. MacIntyres, at any rate, held lands under different chiefs of other names, and fought under different banners."

the argument I think might be important is: "Like Gow (Smith), MacNair (Son of the Heir) and others.... there is room for the supposition that the name was derived not from one but from many individuals who each in his own district, were actual workers in wood..."

Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Frohman
Hi Tomaterols,

To continue the conversation started here

I'm not the right person to ask about uploading new images, but there's plenty of help out there. Hopefully the Cathedral magazine could release one picture of him, and even then there are "fair use" arguments you can use to include a picture. I just added pictures that were also in use on other articles, by hunting through the links. I nose around wikipedia and try to improve it as I go, so I hope you like the improvements I made.

No need to bounce around talk pages, I'll watch this page and reply here if needs be. Bigger digger (talk) 00:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * And I've already indented for you! BD Very thoughtful of you, especially the indent.  I do like the pictures very much.  Meanwhile, I have, as of today, sent a two-page letter to the Cathedral magazine (which is really just part of the overall Cathedral administration), requesting a picture.  The Cathedral is undergoing a good bit of upheaval at present.  Somehow they had gotten themselves into a considerable budget crisis even before the recession hit, and have been laying off staff for some time.  I did give them my e-mail address and phone number, so I imagine I will get a response of some sort.  When they held the Cathedral's final dedication, nearly 20 years ago, Frohman's successor set the final pinnacle.  At one point he announced that he was putting a trowlful of mortar on the stone in memory of Philip Frohman.  I was disappointed that there was only belated, scattered applause.  When I discovered he merited only a Wiki stub, I decided I had to do something about it.  Sorry to ramble on.  If I can ever be of assistance please do ask.--Tomaterols (talk) 01:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, it's nice to stumble across an article I can help on its way! It is indeed a shame no-one recognised Frohman's role at the ceremony you attended, but it's great you've been able to improve the article on him to such a great extent. If you don't get much joy from the Cathedral it's possible we could still use an image under WP:NFCC, so let me know if you hear from them or not in a month or so and we can work something out. Bigger digger (talk) 13:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Clan MacIntyre article
No problem. The effort you put into the MacIntyre article shows. You've certainly got the basics down, so no worries, and i'd like to help out if i can. There are a couple other editors interested in clan-type articles; the easiest way to get feedback from them i think would be bringing it up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Clans of Scotland. Once you're satisfied with the MacIntyre article you could also nominate it for a Good Article.--Celtus (talk) 07:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * agree with Celtus: Clan MacIntyre is looking set for a nomination as a Good Article. Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

About the rating: actually i think anyone can change the rating of the 'quality' & 'importance' levels. So you yourself can change the level on any article you're working on, its really just a judgement call. I think only the GA and FA levels that need to be reviewed by outside people. There's a bit of a guide to rating articles here: WikiProject Clans of Scotland/Assessment.--Celtus (talk) 05:12, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

About the footnotes: that'd make sense because the second paragraph has five footnotes stacked and one note at the end. Just wondering which of those refs gives "MacArill", you could specifically footnote the info within the brackets. Sometimes if you look through featured articles you can see new ways to to 'wikify' articles. Like David I of Scotland is a good one, and its consistently got about two refs within a single footnote. I noticed that in the 'Notes' section in 'Clan MacIntyre' you've got the refs manually typed in. There's another format you can use for 'notes' that lets you place references there just like you normally would within the text of the article. I mentioned the same thing couple days ago at Scottish clan. Currently you're using this style:. But if you use this style: then the footnotes will appear at the end of the 'note' just like they do with the body of the article (for example see how they show up here: Scottish clan). Just browsing through the featured articles i think is the easiest way to learn new ways of doing things. Users Angusmclellan and Deacon of Pndapetzim have worked on some great Scottish/Mediaeval articles.--Celtus (talk) 04:48, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Re template: that'd make sense to me too. Its certainly not a controversial edit, but you could also could bring it with him directly, or on template's talkpage.--Celtus (talk) 05:31, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Heraldry art
The first thing your artist friend should be aware of is that the art placed under a open source free license, the artist no longer owns the art, others may use or change the art add lib. I think they may even be able to commercially exploit the art. I am not overly familiar with the subject of license and copyright so you are better to address another about the subject. I am aware there are different licenses, but bare in mind wiki is often copied from, regardless of the terms in the small print under certain images. A few notes however on my feelings:- "family" arms are exploited and sold over the net frequently, this is incorrect, but the law on arms is feudal and only enforceable in Britain (wiki operates under the law of Florida), the rights of copyright are usually enforced through modern copyrights which is internationally quite strong. As I feel uneasy about this exploitation, I try when possible to give "free" arms via Wiki. An important point for me is that Wiki can display the arms correctly as belonging to an individual (and give references to this effect). My suggestion is to give simple arms (i.e. just the shield) as a start, see how the artist fells about the situation, before moving on to anything intricate (i.e. supporters). Of interest, a group of French artists are creating an excellent wiki project dedicated to the drawing of arms, see wiki Projet:Blasons. Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 20:10, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Henry Sinclair
Thanks for the update on the link... and for the fix. I would not call the Rosslyn Templars org. a reliable source on their own ... but as a "host" for a document originally published in a scholarly journal (what WP calls a "convenience link") they are fine. The key to any of the articles relating to the Sinclairs and Rosslyn Chapel is to make it clear to the reader what is widely accepted by historians as being fact, what is proposed by popular authors as speculative theory, and what is clearly absolute fiction (a-la Dan Brown). All three types of information can be discussed in the articles if we keep this basic distinction in mind. Blueboar (talk) 19:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Award
Sorry about the image, I couldn't use any from the article. Spongefrog (talk) 18:12, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Re
Thanks for saying thanks. I'm sure you can give people Barnstars for their sense of humour (hint, hint), perhaps the Barnstar of good humour. --Spongefrog (talk) 10:03, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: recent changes
It looks to me like the intention was just to standardise the section per WP:Manual of Style. According to WP:Layout, that section is usually titled something like "References", "Notes", "Sources". If you mimick and follow along the lines of featured articles then those kind of 'standardisation' edits shouldn't happen too much. But i think the longer you keep an article on your watchlist you'll notice that those kind of edits happen all the time. There's not much you can do about it once you press 'save' to let an article go into the wild. WP:Ownership of articles says, "if you don't want your material to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it". I understand the frustration at be dogged around. I think in this case though, it is just that he has those articles on his watchlist, and following your major edits his intent was only to improve on them by standardising them.--Celtus (talk) 05:34, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed about the divider. I think there ought to be one there too it makes things clearer. Look at the FA Stigand: "Notes", "Footnotes", "References", "Further reading". How about that?--Celtus (talk) 04:32, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * re image. I've never done anything quite like this before either. I think the hardest bit of wikipedia is the looking for and understanding the appropriate licensing. If you go here: Upload, and choose the second option "The work of someone else, who has given permission to use it on Wikipedia or it is a work released under a free license", it says you can email "permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org" with a record of the author's agreement. Look at this Requesting copyright permission, and then the section beneath ("When permission is confirmed"). So if you can get the artist to email that form back to you, then i guess you send a copy of that to the address given, then you can upload the image with the template, then an admin or someone will eventual verify things and everything will be settled. Here are the templates for the licenses he can choose from: Template:GFDL and Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0, so he knows exactly what they mean.--Celtus (talk) 06:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I'd add a weblink to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ before the 'legal code' link, to make the license even more clear and easier to understand. The actual legal code page is pretty intense (at least to me). The article certainly looks GAish to me. Maybe there could be a sentence or two on the Clan MacIntyre Association. Though i can't find much actual information about it on the website (like when it was formed and all that). The website mentions how it is open to MacIntyres and [Scottish] Wrights and that it takes part in various highland games etc,. Oh don't worry, i'm happy to help out with the wiki stuff, no need to apologise or anything like that. I'm quite interested to see how the arms turned out. Hopefully this consent/permission thing works out.--Celtus (talk) 09:11, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I just added that link to the 'simple' version of the licence in the draft email. Hopefully that's alright.--Celtus (talk) 09:16, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think an infobox will be the standard in the future, but the box itself might change. I think Le Deluge wants to take a crack giving it a makeover (see Template talk:Infobox Clan). I too like the bottom profile section the best because we can add much more information there than in a narrow box. I was thinking maybe we could make something like the template on Charles, Prince of Wales. Something where there is room to give a comment on certain things like the arms or whatever, it could hold the septs as-well.--Celtus (talk) 05:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and stuff
Thanks a lot for that barnstar, I can't believe I've got so many awards in just a few months. Anyway, its just that my name's MacIntyre, and I thought I'd see if there was an article. Sorry if I've missed out any 'L's, the key is almost broken. Spongefrog (talk) 19:54, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for asking...
Thanks for your last message. Be free to edit the infobox or whatever you think is the right thing to do. I've been away from wikipedia for months (I just read your message), and I think I'll remain away for several months more. Good day and have a nice week.

Omar1976 (talk) 22:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Clan MacIntyre and profile on Template:Infobox Clan
Hello, sorry about the delay replying. I posted a new experimental infobox on important clans and those clans who have active editors. My hope was to generate interest and discussion at Template talk:Infobox Clan. The title "profile" in the info box is just a summary to say where the information is copied from. I think the secondary title will probably be "Crest Badge" and another heading "Clan profile" and some such description. As I see it, the Infobox is not a replacement of the "profile" section, see my thinking at "general guideline" at Template:Infobox Clan. In my view, a profile section would still be necessary to explain, translate and for greater detail. For a general idea of how I think the info box should be used, see Royal Badge of Wales and Great Seal of the United States, Coat of arms of Prince Edward Island, Coat of arms of Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, Coat of arms of Orkney. These info boxes just give a summery, repeating all info in greater detail within the articles. Re the Campbell slogan, yes it would need a reference, will attend. Just placed the information there on the off chance it might be important, if you think it is not relevant to the Clan MacIntyre article, just delete. Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 13:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Sleat plant badge
Hi Tomaterols. I'm working on the Macdonalds of Sleat (User:Celtus/sandbox), and was wondering if you've still got access to the book Collins Scottish Clan & Family Encyclopedia listed in the Clan MacIntyre article? I don't a have specific reference for the plant badge of the the Macdonalds of Sleat, and that book is quite recent. No worries if you don't currently have the book.--Celtus (talk) 07:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. I had noticed that the chief's standard contains "two sprigs of common heather" so i guess that's what it would likely be.--Celtus (talk) 05:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Remember me? No? Never mind.
How you doing? Still editing? Still alive? Anyway, nice to hear from you, even if you don't respond for months/years or never, Lord Spongefrog  (review)   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  19:23, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Clan MacIntyre
Passed GA! If you have the time please review another one as there's quite a backlog, this one is almost ready for FAC, maybe have a Copyedit done to satisfy the Style experts there! Cheers!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 20:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Woohhooo! Congratulationses, Lord Spongefrog,  (I am Czar of all Russias!)  21:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Alt Text, sorry...I was actually writing that while I was coding something else and typed "tag" for text! Grat piece, I printed it out and read it last night and again, this morning...looking forward to seeing it at FAC in the near future! Merry Christmas from a Mac An Tsaoir!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 00:31, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks really good!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 17:46, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Cruachan
You can put it back if you want. Use of the woed "also", in writing, is one of my pet peeves, it signifies a weak writer.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 14:00, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 28 November 2023 (UTC)