User talk:Johnbod/31

nominate

) 07:18, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Sine Cerere et Baccho friget Venus

On 7 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sine Cerere et Baccho friget Venus, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that art around 1600 AD illustrating the proverb Without Ceres and Bacchus, Venus freezes may reflect the patronage of Haarlem's brewers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sine Cerere et Baccho friget Venus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Thanks for helping with the main page Victuallers (talk) 23:34, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Peer Review

Hello. I noticed that you're active at the Maya FAC, and I wondered if you would be interested in providing some feedback at Wikipedia:Peer review/Chetro Ketl/archive1. RO^(talk) 16:27, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Chape

On 15 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Chape, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a chape (example pictured) is a protective fitting at the end of a scabbard and is sometimes decorated? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Chape. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Pax (liturgical object)

On 26 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pax (liturgical object), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the order in which Mass-goers kissed the pax led to disputes and sometimes violence in the Middle Ages? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pax (liturgical object). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:50, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1953 chalk ware cameo

How much would this be worth HCHAMPI (talk) 06:20, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No idea Johnbod (talk) 11:51, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1953 chalk ware cameo

Bought at an estate sale for $5 for pair...looked expensive HCHAMPI (talk) 06:22, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration enforcement

By motion, the Arbitration Committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:

1. The case is to be opened forthwith and entitled "Arbitration enforcement";
2. During the case, no user who has commented about this matter on the
   Case Requests page
   , may take or initiate administrative action involving any of the named parties in this case.
3. Reports of alleged breaches of (2) are to be made only by email to the Arbitration Committee, via the main contact page.

You are receiving this message because you have commented about this matter on the

ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

You are receiving this message either because you are a party to the

No - it isn't - see 19 June Johnbod (talk) 01:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 July 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nainsukh, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that 18th-century Indian artist Nainsukh is known for his unusually informal paintings of a raja, whose ashes he eventually consigned to the river Ganges? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nainsukh. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Thank you for your help (pass it on) Victuallers (talk) 12:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Elfshot, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Waybread and Nettles. 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) 09:48, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We hope

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 July 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Toilet service, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a toilet service (pictured), containing as many as 48 pieces in silver or silver-gilt for the dressing-table, was a wedding present for rich women from the 17th century onwards? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Toilet service. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:36, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for contributing to the grant request for training Wikipedia admins to be more aware of sexism! This grant has been approved in pilot form, and the Ada Initiative is running an Ally Skills Workshop at Wikimania 2015. This workshop will focus on teaching specific skills and techniques directly relevant to Wikipedia admins and editors, and in particular will teach people about the psychology of trolls. The workshop will be on Thursday July 16 from 2pm to 5pm in Don Diego 3.

If you are attending Wikimania, you are invited to apply to the Ally Skills Workshop! Space is limited and we may not be able to accept all applications, so apply now. More information, including a link to the application form, is here:

Ally Skills Workshop description and application form

People of all genders are welcome to attend. Unfortunately, travel scholarships for Wikimania are already closed and we don't know of any other sources of travel funding. If you know anyone else attending Wikimania who might be interested in attending this workshop, please encourage them to apply!

Thank you for your time,

Valerie Aurora (Instructor and Interim Executive Director of the Ada Initiative)

Valerietai (talk) 22:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you intend to perform the required QPQ review so that this nomination can be promoted? --Allen3 ^talk 13:17, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

revwd Template:Did you know nominations/Michael I Komnenos Doukas - sorry, forgot this was o/s Johnbod (talk) 13:37, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Would you care to look at my message on the talk page there? Thanks. Pelarmian (talk) 15:10, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just about to go away, so won't be able to do anything for a while. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 15:21, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Johnbod, I noticed that on the page Flemish Hunting Deck you changed "Courtyears Hunting Set" to "Courtier's Hunting Set". Someone else made the same change a while back. You seem to know a bit about art so I hoped you can enlighten me because as a native speaker of Dutch: Hofjaren/Courtyears, hof=court jaren=years. But maybe I'm unfamiliar with a term here. Crispulop (talk) 16:57, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Courtier is a word in English but Courtyear isn't. What do years have to do with it? Johnbod (talk) 16:59, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hofjaren is not an official word in Dutch either, that's why I provided a direct translation from the loose words. The Dutch word for courtier is hoveling, which hofjaren clearly is not a misspelling of. I'll scrap the translation from the article as it proves to be confusing and is not mentioned in the sources. Crispulop (talk) 17:03, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's best. Johnbod (talk) 17:04, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am working on a pet project to help digitize information about the field of metalsmithing+jewelry. I started with making a page for Art jewelry forum (AJF), and have a list of artists that I would like to make pages for as well. The AJF page has been nominated for deletion because it is questioned if the organization is "notable". I am reaching out to you because I saw that you edited some pages that relate to studio craft, and thought you may have an informed opinion (unlike the mathematician who nominated the page for deletion) about whether or not it is a "notable organization". If you have an opinion, one way or another, please way in on the articles for deletion discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Art_jewelry_forumClarefinin (talk) 20:41, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Travelling at the moment, but you need stronger independent refs. Johnbod (talk) 21:16, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You made a proposal for what to do at

Ok, I'm away at the moment - will respond over the weekend. Johnbod (talk) 06:21, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Sir Watkin Williams-Wynn, 4th Baronet

added a link pointing to Whig

William Roscoe

added a link pointing to

M.P.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind offer of support. It was noted and appreciated by Kate Dorney (who thinks she has met you) and others, but it was all too hectic with just me and 12 trainees. You know how it is! Anyway there is still plenty of editing, expansion and article creation to be done to help justify their lottery funding -

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for revising the Elfshot page, Johnbod. If you don't mind, I'll do some more work on it, as I've done some of the main academic work on this area. But it'll involve citing some of my own publications, so I'd appreciate it if you'd then look the article over to see if you think I've got the balance right. Does that sound okay to you? Thanks! Alarichall (talk) 10:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. Just let mer know when to look. Thanks, Johnbod (talk) 15:40, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Johnbod. Now the dust has settled on the Maya civilization FAC, I just wanted to say many thanks for taking the time to review the article, and for supporting its promotion - after an epic haul it made FA at the weekend. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 09:10, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, again, on such a splendid article on a huge topic! I'm sure it seemed like it was going on forever, but I suppose its good that so many reviewers went into detail. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 13:09, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 August 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Eadwine Psalter, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Eadwine Psalter of c. 1155–60 has a famous portrait of Eadwine, "prince of scribes" (pictured), and illustrations to the psalms copied from a book then over 300 years old? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eadwine Psalter. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 05:51, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Georgian architecture

added links pointing to John Nash and Neoclassical

Prodigy house

added a link pointing to Recorder

Tudor architecture

added a link pointing to Sutton Place

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, good to hear from you, and thanks for weighing in. The issue on that article is that an editor doesn't want to know that the article needs reffing because, he argues, it's in summary style, so that's all right then. I hope he'll bow to the inevitable soon. As it happens, I started adding refs to wholly uncited sections, and, running out of time before hols, slapped a wholly justified tag on it, which was promptly removed. I put it back along with an open-and-shut case, which the guy is, remarkably, arguing with. Hence the sermon. I'm (as you know) pretty hands-on with reffing up articles and cutting out the WP:OR, but I don't recall ever coming across someone who boldly claimed it didn't apply to them! All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:31, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think he means that - he adds lots of refs on other stuff. When there are lots of refs to more detailed articles, hopefully with their own refs, the need to ref up broad topical articles does become a bit less urgent, I think. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 02:25, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine to be a little over the limit; we usually don't enforce the limit by trimming until the user has been notified and chooses to do nothing for 24 hours. I didn't even notify you, so it was basically fine to begin with, but don't feel the urge to spend time making it exactly 500 words or whatever. Though I will note, usually people use the evidence space to present some diffs as well, not just a statement. Thanks. (Message made in capacity as an

Thanks. Done now. I have added a few links, which I'm not counting towards the limit. Johnbod (talk) 20:06, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Plaquette, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Concave. 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) 09:45, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Extreme longevity tracking 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. Ricky81682 (talk) 22:03, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prodigy house, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Recorder. 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) 09:01, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 September 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Prodigy house, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1616 Ben Jonson described the prodigy houses (Wollaton Hall pictured) of his day as "proud, ambitious heaps", "built to envious show"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Prodigy house. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

7035 views

Thank you for the "

Many thanks Gerda! Johnbod (talk) 13:31, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Given the centuries of persecution suffered by Welsh-speakers (just read the history - it makes for shocking reading), the fact that the Welsh language still exists as a living language is nothing short of a miracle. Naturally therefore, it is of much interest to those interested in the Welsh language, those interested in Welsh current affairs, those interested in minority languages as well as to many members of the public in general, for it to be acknowledged that certain notable public figures e.g. politicians, sportspeople or musicians have the ability to speak Welsh. Indeed, failing to do so seems to suggest that the Welsh language is of no significance, to anybody. Whilst some may argue that the language that one speaks is not actually significant, this viewpoint is likely to be prevalent in individuals with a limited understanding of minority languages/cultures. Put another way, whilst the fact that a notable person can speak English may not be necessarily of interest - mainly due to the fact that English is the third most widely-spoken language in the world - by contrast, when a notable person who happens also to speak Welsh is not acknowledged as a Welsh speaker this is missing a very important point, simply because Welsh is much less prevalent than English. Yes, defining a cohort of Welsh-speaking people is of interest to many people, even if that does not happen to include the person(s) who instigated the deletion of this category in the first place. Therefore, just as the section 'Notable people with the name Prabhu', or 'Category:Black British people', for example, may not be of interest to a certain individuals, the fact that these Categories/Sections exist confirm the fact that they are of interest to at least some Wikipedia users, and the same is true for 'Category:Welsh-speaking people'. I hope that the majority of Wikipedia users/editors wish to build a more informative and inclusive encyclopaedia, and not an encyclopaedia that projects an Anglo-American bias whereby smaller cultures and languages are dismissed. I therefore call upon those who instigated this deletion to see beyond their possible prejudices, and remain true to Jimmy Wales' Statement of Principles by re-instating this category without further delay please as many useful links have been lost with the current deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haul~cywiki (talk • contribs) 19:26, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your contribution on the

But the British Museum uses 'Edmé', though French WP doesn't. We should use whatever most modern sources use. Johnbod (talk) 04:37, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	I don't know if you're the type to really care for shiny things, but it's a small token of my appreciation for your fine work on here over the years John! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:23, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! Johnbod (talk) 15:01, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wondered if you would be interested in providing some feedback on Jacob van Ruisdael, which I recently nominated for GA. It's in a queue on Wikipedia:Good_article_nominations. I would really appreciate your insights. Edwininlondon (talk) 12:16, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice! I never know what the GA criteria really mean - there is only one reviewer so they are applied in wildly different ways, but this is at least at the standard of most GAs. Most of our DGA painter bios are awful, so its great to see one taken up. I hope you'll do more. Johnbod (talk) 15:00, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Any chance you have time to do an official review to progress it to GA status? I'd be most grateful. Edwininlondon (talk) 21:27, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I never do GA reviews (unlike

WP:FAC ones), & I don't think you are supposed to solicit them. You may have a bit of a wait I'm afraid, though reviewers may find this more tempting that the rest of the arts queue. Johnbod (talk) 17:30, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

You should have received an email a couple of weeks ago regarding your request for access to BMJ. Can you please either fill out the form linked from that email, or let me know if you did not receive it? Thanks, Nikkimaria (talk) 17:24, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You mentioned in the pub that someone mooted the idea of a Wikipedia Medical Conference. That is really growing on me. Was Martin in on that discussion? (He did a great job with that science conference.) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 03:16, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly - I can't quite remember. NB, btw, this lot - did you see the Proj Med talk section above yours? Off to bed now - keep well & again it was great to see you! Johnbod (talk) 03:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. I was looking at all the Washington submissions yesterday. I do think a dedicated medicine conference is needed, though. How about that WT:MED talk section two above mine! That essay is a good start but I'd like to see something with more exhaustive coverage. (I thought it was a bit late for you.) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 04:03, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Johnbod this edit [1] seems like content borrowed from another wiki article. Yes/no? Anyways, if it is, please remember to attribute the other article. No biggie. --Lucas559 (talk) 18:12, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, it isn't. I'm not sure why you would think it was. If you look you will see it is relocating and adding to a passage from the same article, cut in the immediately preceding edit. [2]. Johnbod (talk) 18:43, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

...you mean the edit where I a) brought the article in line with

Yes I do - there was no unreferenced content. Even if there was you DON't just remove content, which you did in 2 ways, when satifying a minor MOS point. Very sloppy. Johnbod (talk) 12:41, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sorry to bother, I had a bit of a question--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:07, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure - email if you like. Johnbod (talk) 19:24, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

it was in regards to DocJames he hasn't put up any edits in almost a weeks time [3] which is unlike him (I know hes on vacation, but that never stops him) and the posts are piling up on his talk page (I'm kinda' answering them)...finally yesterday I emailed him (no response)...do you know if hes under the weather or something?--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:39, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anything - I expect he's just taking a proper break, or maybe hiking etc. Johnbod (talk) 03:05, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see he's back now. Johnbod (talk) 16:30, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

yes... thanks Johnbod--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sermon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dominican. 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) 16:38, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

John,

Yes, only redirects to Plate armour. Johnbod (talk) 00:21, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would look forward to your thoughts, and will jump in, the sources are many. Ceoil (talk) 00:29, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm running a survey to identify the best way to notify Wikimedians about upcoming UK wikimeets (informal, in-person social meetings of Wikimedians), and to see if we can improve UK wikimeets to make them accessible and attractive to more editors and readers. All questions are optional, and it will take about 10 minutes to complete. Please fill it in at:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JJMNVVD

Thanks! Mike Peel (talk) 17:14, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@

It is a massively abstruse term, as the discussions amply demonstrate. I can't help suspecting that is why you like it so much. I am just applying normal MOS standards. I suggest you read the guidelines on section headings, which should be kept as simple as possible. The word is used immediately below too. Johnbod (talk) 12:32, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You should assume good faith and keep your 'suspicions' to the back of your mind. When you say the TP discussions, you are of course referring to the fact that only you and an IP found it hard to understand. I responded to all the points you made then; this was eighteen days ago. Am allowed to 'suspect' that you have waited this long to change it in the hope that no-one would notice? And the fact that the

^{Imperatrix Mundi} 12:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

You should assume good faith and keep your 'suspicions' to the back of your mind. Did I actually participate in the discussion? I don't remember doing so. I improved a bad section heading that was causing squabbles. That's all. Please calm down. Johnbod (talk) 12:46, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You participated here. You asked why the word was used; I replied, cogently, with sources. 'Calm down' indeed.

^{Imperatrix Mundi} 12:51, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Why use a word that 9999 of 10000 people will have no clue what it means? Hell, *I* studied medieval history in college and *I* had never heard of that word or seen it used in connection with Henry VI. Use a simpler word. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:53, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey hope you are doing well. There is a page you have contributed to that is being considered for deletion: List of Christian Nobel laureates. You are welcome to put in any input on the issues by going to the page and clicking on the link for that article. Jobas (talk) 14:22, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Luristan bronze, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Situla. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't edit when you're tired and emotional - it just makes you look stupid.Eustachiusz (talk) 11:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I call them as I see them - it was a really stupid edit. Johnbod (talk) 13:57, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the title back minus the definite article per

Or to discuss the reversion! I think you are are clearly wrong, but whatever. No need to thank me for improving the articles! I'll leave you to get on with it for now. You might find the "in use" template handy. 19:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

WP:BRD. They are initial stubs, and remain so at this point. It will probably take me a couple of weeks to get them to something half decent, which they are very definitely not at the moment. DeCausa (talk) 20:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

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.

Motif (visual arts)

added links pointing to Ornament and Gul

Luristan bronze

added a link pointing to Whetstone

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I wonder if I can ask for a few quick thoughts. I've spent <quite a while> working on Mathematics and art and think it's about ready for GA; and then realised that Mathematics and architecture was in a ridiculously stubby state, and have now already spent a while on that (much further out of my comfort zone, really). As there are seem to have been no resident editors (Cerberuses?) for some years - is that what's happening all over Wikipedia, I wonder? - I am feeling in need of a second opinion. I've mentioned the Parthenon, Vitruvius, the Italian Renaissance, and sketched some of the main mathematical splendours of 20th century architecture; and am wondering what else I ought to cover? I've already gone way beyond the elementary accounts (most of which whiffle on about the golden ratio, worse luck). Hmm? Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:10, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm - not my areas at all, either architecture or maths! On the art one, you don't seem to be using a comprehensive account of the whole subject - but these must exist, no.

ISBN 0198813295

- mainly in Part II. There's not too much on ornament forms, though I dare say these get very complicated very quickly. Should be GA-ready.

Again on the architecture one I'd try to find a single comprehensive account. You don't mention the curved columns of the Parthenon and other classical buildings. Can't see Sacred geometry mentioned - another really terrible article. Is Vitruvian module there, or Modulor? With them added, the dire Proportion (architecture) could be redirected. You could ask for advice, or help, at the Maths project. Those are my "few quick thoughts" - I hope they are some use! Johnbod (talk) 18:07, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, and exactly - the topic frightens off everybody who knows A but not B, B but not A, and neither A nor B, which is most of us, I think. I've mentioned Sacred geometry in the M & art article, so I know where to look on that subject! Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:18, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think would be the best place to link "volumetric modeling" to? Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 04:19, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Volume (art) or Modelling (art) I think. Basic stuff we don't have. Johnbod (talk) 13:48, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I started a discussion about ledes in general. I invite you to this. --George Ho (talk) 06:43, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See this religious source [4] - and the rest[5] I found when searching for the use of idol to describe a Murti. Or these[6]. I don't want to edit war, but Wikipedia can't state that as a fact. Doug Weller (talk) 13:57, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I said somewhere, it is a peculiarity of Indian English that idol is not pejorative, although the people who introduced the word to India certainly meant it to be so. One might say that. Johnbod (talk) 16:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And that was Christian prejudice against non-Christians, pure and simple. Nonetheless we can't say it's always pejorative,. It's used here[7] in a specifically non-pejorative sense.

And of course your statement isn't sourced. You know we need sources for something like that. And we need to make it clear that it is used in Indian English in a non-pejorative way for Hindus to discuss their religious practices. Doug Weller (talk) 18:27, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See footnote 552, which rather proves my point! Johnbod (talk) 01:58, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also various at several here and this here. I could go to nearly always. Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 October 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Luristan bronze, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that scenes on Iron Age Luristan bronzes (example illustrated) from Iran include "odd-looking demons and animals apparently involved in cultic and mythological activities"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Luristan bronze. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 11:36, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• 5326 views

hi my friend could you plz paraphrase this ____ Potter was never at her best when writing for a clearly defined audience._____

thank you Alborzagros (talk) 14:46, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The paraphrase of Kutzer seems adequate already. Johnbod (talk) 14:53, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Question: just noticed on my Working page new Title/URL formatting for FR links. The suggestion is in red, looking like this:

• Bernal, I, Coe, M; et al. (1973). The Iconography of Middle American sculpture. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art. {{cite book}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); External link in |title= (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) (see index)

This is seen through all FR links (including previously approved links). The FR links that have already been added to Wiki pages display the new instruction (see: Royal Academy Summer Exhibition). Would you happen to know if Wikipedia will be converting all the past FR links to the new formatting? Or will this be something we will have to edit ourselves manually? Thank you for any insight! Csldigicol (talk) 15:39, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no. I just mentioned this on your page. I see from the category that collects these errors Category:CS1_errors:_external_links that there are over 11,000 of them, so someone may eventually set up a bot to autocorrect them, which I doubt would be difficult for those who can do these things. The links still work, so for now I'd concentrate on getting the new ones right. Johnbod (talk) 16:27, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok will do-- thanks so much! Csldigicol (talk) 13:24, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cathedral close, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Limburg. 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) 09:45, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey hope you are doing well. There is a page again is being considered for deletion: List of Christian Nobel laureates. You are welcome to put in any input on the issues by going to the page and clicking on the link for that article. Jobas (talk) 15:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnbod: I appreciate your note of encouragement. I was reading your Rock relief draft. Consider including Descent of the Ganges (Mahabalipuram), the Hampi rock reliefs 1 and 2, etc. These are not inside caves, nor complete statues. Petra rock reliefs in Jordan is worth a mention. Yungang Grottoes are partly Buddhist rock relief (the more impressive and more preserved art is inside the caves, of course). Qenko rock reliefs in Peru, from what I remember, are geometric shapes and a puma relief... may be worth mentioning. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:06, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(ps): Kbal Spean in Cambodia too. The rock reliefs are both on the rocks along the river and the river bed rock. Mostly Hindu, some Buddhist. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, yes it's early days - this is a spin-off from

User:Johnbod/Persian art, an even larger gap. I was certainly going to include Mahabalipuram, which unlike most of these I've actually seen, and others. There must be more Chinese ones, but its striking how relatively restricted the range is - you'd think they would appeal to the Greeks & Romans, but not at all. If put high enough, it's a good strategy for keeping your self-promotion intact over the ages, at least until just recently. Jago or Jason from the BM was at some decent but peeling regional Olmec reliefs on the telly just recently, but I can't remember the name. You don't know that, by any chance? I've just recently become aware of your work, which is great and really necessary stuff. Keep up the good work! If religious bickering gets you down, art history articles are usually much more tranquil - nobody much cares what you put at Indian art, Jain art etc. Our coverage is pretty terrible. Johnbod (talk) 20:20, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

@Johnbod: Olmec... Chalcatzingo? Art history is a fascinating subject indeed. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:00, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's the place, and we have a decent article too - Chalcatzingo - thanks! Johnbod (talk) 21:04, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Johnbod,

Thank you very much for commenting at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/From The Doctor to my son Thomas/archive1.

You're totally correct, it should be in British English.

I went through and made some copy-edits.

Could you double check, at

Thanks very much,

— Cirt (talk) 02:59, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good question, but not a quote. :) — Cirt (talk) 16:13, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok; done it all now Johnbod (talk) 16:14, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Johnbod !!! Most appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 16:18, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Action on Smoking and Health

added a link pointing to Charity

Psychomachia

added a link pointing to Corpus Christi College

Sancai

added a link pointing to

Luohan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments a few days ago at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bristol/archive2. I wondered if you had any time to look at the changes I made (19th century history & expanding architecture)?— Rod ^talk 17:48, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you intend to link to a disambiguation page, as you did here, please follow

Apparantly the image is "gigantic" and "too big". Ealdgyth - Talk 19:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried - otherwise coming back 10 days later often works.... As I have have 300px as default it looks really nice & gigantic to me! All the best, Johnbod (talk) 04:10, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi you have made some comments on my article History of Islam.I have mentioned the problems.Please give your opinions on the talk page of that article.Arman ad60 (talk) 16:27, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moving this here because it's off topic in the case discussion:

I wish your non-nonsense acceptance of the fact that politics (e.g. fear of litigation, and "won't get fooled again" stance-taking) is strongly influencing at least the US medical profession's approach, were adopted by MEDRS. In several long threads at

Well yes. I suggest you don't try editing any article that QG is taking an interest in then! Johnbod (talk) 01:23, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think I remember him being part of the discussion at WT:MEDRS before I walked away in frustration/disgust. But he was not alone. There's some serious confusion going on, despite

WP:NOR

providing clear definitions of what they mean here, about what a primary, secondary or tertiary source is for WP purposes. Some people familiar with these terms from their own fields, where they often have widely divergent meanings from discipline to discipline, seem unwilling to recognize that WP is not topically applying different definitions of "secondary source". Nor that WP depends on reliable secondary sources from reputable publishers than run them through an editorial process independent of the author (i.e. there are many sources that are technically secondary in by being analytic/synthetic, but which must be treated as primary because of their preconceived or unreviewed conclusions). I haven't figured out what to do about this problem, but it's pretty serious. It seems to relate some to the refusal in certain circles to accept that it is not the best practice on WP to cite the new-research journal papers and ignore the literature reviews that integrate them, rather than the other way around. In [many fields of] academic publishing it is the cutting-edge research that is sought, and lit. reviews are basically boring homework, but it's the opposite for us here; we're depending on the peer-reviewed evaluation and interpretation in the lit. revs. to tell us what hypotheses in the assertive papers has found acceptance or been rejected. Sorry, I know you know all this already; I'm just working out how to word an approach to reopening this issue.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This change, along with others, seems to be stemming from Template_talk:S-rel#Introduce_two_new_parameters where two users decided that Catholic doesn't apply... yikes. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:51, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he's been doing all the early Popes, which has more reason. We seem to have invented something called the "Great Catholic Church" for pre the final E-W split. This is a typical example of the trouble infoboxes cause. This seems very silly - let me know if you pursue. Johnbod (talk) 02:13, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on the template talk page. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:33, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jon, I cannot agree with Ealdgyth's summary, but I hope you will join the discussion at Template talk:S-rel. tahc ^chat 03:47, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For St Cuthbert Gospel which I read today and hung off every word. A glowing example of Wkipedia's best. CassiantoTalk 20:02, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks - much appreciated! Johnbod (talk) 20:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Lansdowne House

added links pointing to George Dance and Robert Smirke

Etching

added a link pointing to

Photochemical milling

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Johnbod I came across this source, and I remembered your wanting to write something on regulation. Perhaps it will be useful. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.12898/full AlbinoFerret 19:56, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - mainly relevant to the odd situation in Oz though - not much talk of actual bans in most places. But useful. Johnbod (talk) 01:54, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3926346/ I have added it to the article as it had a good definition for Harm Reduction, but its more on regulation. AlbinoFerret 21:14, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

when you changed it to refrences, i meant external links.JerrySa1 (talk) 00:55, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No you didn't Johnbod (talk) 01:51, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-nominated the article