User talk:CJLL Wright/Archive VII
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| ARCHIVE INDEX | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 |
| 2009 | 2010–11 | 2012 | |
|
|
| ||
Aug '06 — Sep '06
My RFA and your vote
 |
Hello again CJLL, Thanks for participating in my RFA! Ultimately, no consensus was reached, but I still appreciate the fact that you showed up to add in your two cents. Hopefully I'll see you around WikiProject WS again in the near future... You can feel free to talk to me about it or add some advice on my improvement page.
|
Hi Ikiroid, it's a pity that no consensus was reached this time around, for I've no doubt you'd make a fine admin. Regardless, your contributions around here remain appreciated, and if you are interested to nominate again at some future point, I'd wager on a positive result. And thanks for your work on WikiProject WS, I remain interested in its objectives and will look to participate when and where I can, although presently I am focussed on Mesoamerica-related articles. One thing I'd like to get around to soon is to improve coverage and content for Mesoamerican writing systems, so will probably be consulting with WP:WS then. All the best, and see you around, --cjllw | TALK 23:26, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
otomi language help (weird problem)
Hi. Thanks for helping with my Otomi language page. Something weird has happened though, the page seems to have been defaced with no possibility of reverting. I don't know how it happened or how to fix it, nor where to ask for assistsance. Maybe you do?--Maunus 06:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I dont know what the problem was. I only saw the first part of the page and no tabs for editing. But now it is fine. Thanks!--Maunus 07:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Proposal for a Wikiproject on the United States
I have proposed creating a Wikiproject on the United States. See Talk:United States#Proposal for a Wikiproject on the United States. I assume there will be no objection to the proposal. Planning for the future, I'm thinking that I would use the WP:MESO and WP:AZTEC projects as a template for this new project. I'm interested in your thoughts about what changes you would make in these project templates. In other words, I want to incorporate all our best ideas in these two projects before using them as a template for the new project.
--Richard 22:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Could use your advice & insight at Olmec
CJLL, a photographer has been adding his/her photos to the Olmec page and, in my opinion, cluttering up the article. How many colossal head photos do we need?? To be honest, if we wanted a third or fourth, there are better photos in the Commons. And what in the world is that black thing he/she insists on adding?
I've started a discussion on his/her talk page, but things seems to be even worse today. This editor is well-meaning, but . . .
I could use your help in drawing the line &/or straightening out the article, &/or convincing the other editor that things are fine as they stand. Your thoughts? Madman 23:02, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well, things are better at the Olmec article in terms of images, helped in part by Maunus' upload of a number of photos, which I used to strengthen the new Gallery (now) at the end of the article.
- Second, I wanted to offer you my thanks for saying the things I didn't feel I could say in my Featured Picture nomination. The latest example is your question to EamonnPKeane on how he could find that map confusing. I was just totally floored by that comment, but didn't want to seem combative.
- Finally, I noticed that you had created the glyphs in the Maya Calendar. Did you create a "shell glyph" for the zero used in the Long Count calendar? Long story (I got my image -- the Tres Zapotes Stela C one -- reverted on the 0 (number) article because it didn't have a shell glyph), but I was thinking if you had one then I could add that to the article.
- Anyway, all for now, thanks again. Madman 04:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- That's quite alright, Madman. If I had any expertise in creating SVG formats I could help out there more promptly (I think my raw converted SVG file won't really do the trick), but presently I'm equally in the dark as you about that format. I've installed that Inkscape prog, but would take a bit of playing around first before I could get much use out of it.
2005 Cronulla riots page
Thanks for your support, and your refreshingly sensible comments. Tpth 03:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- You're most welcome, Tpth, and thanks to you for your efforts in cleaning it up and reigning in some of the more excessive passages. I for one had become a little wearied at trying to clean up and combat some of the POV on that pg, glad to see a fresh pair of hands competently taking it on. Cheers,--cjllw | TALK 04:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Check this out. Seems like something you would be interested in. --Richard 07:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up, Richard - will look into it, could be interesting. Cheers,--cjllw | TALK 01:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
screen display
Probably because of the size of my screen, the barnstars on your user page overlap the userboxes. Looks kinda yukky. Ling.Nut 22:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
- The arrangement looks fine to me. I may look into it, but not a priority at the moment.--cjllw | TALK 23:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Olmec
Hi
I read your Olmec page and found that it fails to reflect current genetic data, epigraphic data and skeletal evidence that show an African influence among the Olmec. For example, you claim that the their is no genetic evidence of Africans in ancient Mexico, yet recent research shows that many Indians show African admixture, some of these groups in areas where African Americans and Mexican Blacks never existed.
In addition you failed to mention the fact that African skeletons have been found in Olmec cemeteries. This along with the fact that you claim there was no evidence of writing among the Mande people in ancient times or in Africa generally around the time of the Olmec civilization is also misleading.
Sunday I attempted to retify this matter by adding additional information representing these facts. Information, that was throughly referenced with citations from refereed journals. I would like to work with you on making this section on the Africans truely reflect the state of the knowledge base relating to the possible African influence on the Olmec.
As a result, I would like to know if we can come to a mutual agreement on revising this section of the Olmec page?Clyde Winters 04:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- Olmec98/Clyde Winters, thanks for your post. I would think (or hope) that all of us here would be more than amenable to discussing ways to reach consensus in improving the Olmec article, within the framework of what wikipedia is and is not. However, places such as my talk page are little-visited, and so I suggest that any and all such discussion be continued on at the article's talk page -talk:Olmec- which would be the most appropriate and visible place for all interested parties to participate. I shall also make this suggestion at your talk page.--cjllw | TALK 06:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. I will send a sample of possible changes soon.Clyde Winters 13:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Below are the suggested changes for the African Olmec Section:
- <NOTE: Text of Olmec98/Clyde Winters' suggested changes has been moved (by me, cjllw) to talk:Olmec alternative origin speculations, which would be a more appropriate forum for general discussion on the proposed changes.>
- RegardsClyde Winters 13:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Clyde/Olmec98, as noted above I have moved the text of your suggested changes you had posted at my talk page above, to the talk page for the associated article. That talk page would be the most appropriate place to continue any discussion on your suggested text and the Olmec articles in general, so please do involve yourself in the discussion there. Regards, --cjllw | TALK 23:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Matthew William Stirling
Hi, I am in the process of creating the Matthew William Stirling page, and was wondering which Mesoamerica category could reference it. Could you help? Thanks, Sdsouza 17:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hey Sdsouza, congrats on an excellent article - very well done indeed! Thanks and regards, --cjllw | TALK 23:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Need your advice on Olmec "French School"
CJLL, I am presently having a discussion with a certain "Olmeque" over at the Olmec article. Here are my concerns:
- First, there is no "French school" of Olmec theory. This is a neologism.
- Second, this theory that he is pressing is a marginal theory that, in my own estimation, is not notable enough for our article. I am willing enough to leave this in with the proviso that we keep it relatively small.
- This editor's only goal is to get Magni's book mentioned as many places as possible. With this in mind, I must speculate that he is more interested in having this theory portrayed (positively) than in improving Wikipedia.
In any case, I would hope that you could add your own thoughts to this matter. Madman 00:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- Update: I've moved that addition over to the section of the article that briefly discusses the widespread influence of the Olmec on the rest of Mesoamerica, where it seems to fit well. Hope that works, Madman 03:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- Argh, User:Rune.welsh protected the Olmec page right after Olmeque made one of this reverts. Olmeque has not shown any compromise and has not been willing to discuss the matter at all -- and now that it's frozen with his wording, I can't see any resolution to the matter. I am hoping that you can again intervene here. Honestly, I give up. Madman 13:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
I think Madman's been quite prepared to discuss, but we all seem to be talking at cross-purposes at the moment. Unfortunately I've had little time available of late for wikipedia, so haven't yet had the chance to track down the direct cites. However, I do think that we'll be able to move forward by expanding more on why the Olmec concept is really still quite nebulous, and covering all of the main viewpoints. I'll see if I can suggest some alternate wordings at the talk pg now that Olmeque has clarified a little on what Magni's views are supposed to be.--cjllw | TALK 06:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Olmec
Hi, I ask an arbitration about French School. Can you give me your opinion. Thanks again. Olmeque 22:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks !!
Me again
I see that you've been taking what must be a long-overdue Wiki-break. When you return, I am wondering if you would look at La Venta, which is second on the Meso "Improvement drive: B-Class" list. Is there anything else might be useful or improved there? If not, can we classify as a "Good" or "A" article??
I am also wondering whether you have any immediate plans to develop a statement concerning theories of Olmec development, to fix what has been a sore spot for me. If not, I will begin to develop a consensus document on the Talk page there. It will start, at least, with an explanation of the "mother culture" and "sister culture" theories.
Let me know, Madman 03:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
- Hi there Madman. Yes, unfortunately these past few weeks I've found myself with increasingly little time spare to devote to wikipedia for a variety of reasons, although I have hopes that the situation will soon gradually improve. I'm still dropping by when and where I can, and yes I do still have clarifying certain points about at Olmec on my mental to-do list, but have been a bit remiss going about it. Give me another day or possibly two to start putting these down on virtual paper there. However, as I'm often full of good intentions but the execution may be somewhat tardy, if you are yourself poised to start documenting some of the themes we need to do a better job explaining and referencing, then by all means make a start on it, and let's see what we can come up with- I'd readily trust your judgement and skill.
- As for La Venta, I think it's a commendable article, and you've done a lot with it. There are a couple of things I can think of at the moment which could be added or coverage expanded, I'll look to make some suggestions at the talk page there. It may not be that far off passing GA muster (a wider range of refs might be useful in that regard). Cheers,--cjllw | TALK 05:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)