This 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.
Oh, that! Well, I got it from Iridescent. I think the point is that he did actually say that, so it's more of a statement of undeniable fact rather than a personal attack. But, yes, it was stil indeed lightheartedly, as you say. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 08:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
It's okay. Lighthearted, but still. No worries. And you got that from Iridescent? Hmmm. I guess because Wales is famous, he's fair game to some. But of course, saying "Princess....Dianna" would upset many. And certainly, nobody would say that about Wales because he had been uncivil to others. That would leave the poster without a leg to stand on. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:33, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
(TPW, but seeing as I've been mentioned) @Anna Frodesiak, it's not a personal attack to point out that Jimmy Wales's practice/preaches ratio is famously low when it comes to civility. (As FIM has already pointed out, "Utter fucking bullshit" is a direct quote.) Lest we forget, we're talking about someone who got up on stage at Wikimania and preached a sermon advocating that those he considered "toxic personalities" be kicked out of Wikipedia (anyone who was around at the time is well aware of to whom he was referring), who's admitted in the relatively recent past that he maintains a personal deathlist of editors against whom he has a grudge, and who's uniquely the only admin on Wikipedia who's banned from using the "block" button owing to his use of the tool to further personal disputes. (Technically, he "decided to simply give up the use of the block tool permanently", but that was very much a jumping-before-being-pushed exercise to avoid the negative publicity that would have stemmed from the desysopping that was otherwise inevitable.) If he were a normal editor, he'd have long since been community banned as a crystal-clear example of a WP:NOTHERE tendentious editor. (As a point of reference, these are his last 50 mainspace edits at the time of writing. They stretch back two years, and include outright incompetence like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/June Swann.) ‑ Iridescent 14:16, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 25
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mindhorn, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cameos. 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) 09:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Done
A first
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Fantastic new article! I was just wondering, I thought I would merge some of your apparent duplicate references (especially the many Andreas and Antonias), but then noticed that they all had different ref names, so thought I should check in, as I can see from the Szarmach cite that you definitely know how to use ref names, to see what you were going to do before I started fixing something that may not be an error. Mabalu (talk) 17:00, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Hey, Mabalu, thanks very much for the kind words! Look, those refs have been a pain in my posterior since the beigning :) (in fact refs often are!)- so if you can do it, that would be great, and appreciated. The only reason I haven't done it myself is that I already Refilled them once, but all that seem to do it actially make some of them invisible in the reflist (you'll see it in the history). So I ended up inputing them manually. I didn't dare refill again in case the blooming things disappeared1 But I'm sure you can do a proper job, so go ahread! cheers! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 17:32, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
It's been sorted out! Hope all is in order. Do let me know if you need help in future with similar issues. Mabalu (talk) 17:49, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The Original Barnstar
For tirelessly helping to keep Wikipedia free of userpage spam Dlohcierekim 07:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Hey, I'd forgot about barnstars! Thanks very much, Dlohcierekim, all team work though, you and your fellow Dark Lords Of The Black Mop! Cheers! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 07:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago16 comments4 people in discussion
Ah, I see you got busy! I got sidetracked by Wark(s)worth, and I'm still being sidetracked, but I certainly want to get Brut up at DYK. Your additions have really fleshed it out and I may just go ahead and nominate it. Warkworth is sort of a gift to my friend (whom you see cited in the article, haha) and I'm finishing that up as fast as I can. Thanks for pitching in! Drmies (talk) 15:52, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Err- right! Well- thanks very much! Not sure what you mean, pitching in? - oh, you mean pitching in to fill red links I guess. Anyhow, fair play on namedropping Kauffman :) tell me, does he approach the chronicles from a historical or linguistic prespective, primarilly? Thanking you, Drmies. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 15:59, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
OK, now I see why you didn't see. How do I start this mystery narrative? You started writing Brut Chronicle on 27 April, unbeknownst to me (unless I forgot that I knew, which would be seriously messed up). I started writing Prose Brut on 1 May. The other day I made a redirect, Brut Chronicles, to Prose Brut. For some reason or other, maybe via your contributions, I land in the history of your Brut Chronicle, seeing all those meaty edits, thinking that they are beefing up my Prose Brut--and as you know, the names are used somewhat interchangeably. So I'm thinking you are helping me out, whereas you were SELFISHLY working on YOUR OWN article, haha. You can imagine my surprise when I discovered that you and I were working on the same thing, under different names, separately.
So, next step--what do we do? We should merge these things, of course. We don't have to fight over the title: Brut Chronicle works just fine for me. I have some info on the MSS that you don't, and you have much more of everything else--the state of my article is explained by the fact that I'm going through Matheson section by section. (He needs an article, by the way--in the copy I have here is the handout he prepared for a reading at the Zoo, 2005...) What say you? I'm tackling Warkworth while we figure this out, and let's go ahead anyway and nominate yours for DYK. And then we get Mike Christie on board, and Ealdgyth, and put a gold star on it. Drmies (talk) 17:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I don't believe it. Unbelievable. I only started writing it at your nudge too! Remember your edit summary on my last article here ('no article on this?')- and I thought, that's a good idea! Really sorry- probably should have warned you! Well, whatever about the size of it, your prose is far more- chiselled, than mine, shall we say? -some of my sentences are longer than the Krays,' apparently :) — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 17:17, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
No, don't pull it--it's fine, and if you like (after all, it's your work) we can propose an ALT hook which is very much like yours. I'll quote Matheson: "The Middle English prose Brut survives in more manuscripts than any other Middle English work except the two Wycliffite translations of the Bible." Drmies (talk) 17:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
No skin off my nose; yes that's a good quote. Oddly, I thought I'd used it too- but obviously not! Well, let's get Matheson on the front page then. Please atend to it in your own time :) — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 17:48, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Hey now! Don't you know this newfangled youngster 13th century stuff is not my thing! (grins). I actually don't think I have much on the Brut Chronicles ... it really is past my normal period. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:22, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Me neither, but I'd be happy to help out with reviews, so long as it's not in the next two or three weeks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:53, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Mike, I haven't even started grading final exams... Drmies (talk) 18:36, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Haha I just deleted your article. If you were an admin you could undo me. Drmies (talk) 23:59, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
And we're back. I'm merging some of the stuff. Drmies (talk) 00:01, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Undo you? By the time that happens, you'll be 'crat, steward, and founder- and still not getting undone! That's a great article now. Really great. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 07:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
May 2017
Latest comment: 6 years ago11 comments5 people in discussion
That's you told. ‑ Iridescent 12:13, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
It wasn't me! Ho ho ho :) i forgot to delete this. I wanted to find the template for spam, but forgot it would transclude. I'll just have to give up my UPE-business devoted to promoting the medieval gentry :D I've made two groats and a duck's egg so far Found what I wanted ...eventually. Thanks for the reminder! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 12:22, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Unbelievable. Exactly how does one promte a 170-year-old painting??? Hex Enduction Hour on the other hand... tweaking WP is probably all the PR Mark E. Smith can afford! Ha! In any case, I prefer Perverted by Language, which makes me totally NPOV. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 12:43, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Wait! You mean I can avoid main page day for "my" FAs by getting some sort of "commercial" tie somewhere in them??? QUICK! I must do this somehow! (snorts). Ealdgyth - Talk 12:47, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) That's really interesting - this led me to a rule that you can have slightly larger lede images in painting articles, so I have just done this same fix on a Turner article I reviewed yesterday. Good to know. Thanks Iridescent! Mabalu (talk) 16:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Regarding "how does one promote a 170-year-old painting", the argument is that by potentially generating interest in a particular artwork, people might go to see it who wouldn't otherwise have done so, and that means the article is "commercial". Ealdgyth, I guarantee that the lunatic fringe of the TOU police would consider Battle of Hastings "spam"—you are clearly employed by the tourist board of either Battle, Bayeux or Westminster, or at a push Reading. If you read the thread I link above, you'll see people arguing quite seriously that Wikipedia's articles on Rihanna songs should be banned from appearing on the main page as they're clearly produced by her PR department (obviously, this internationally-famous celebrity who's rarely out of the newspapers is desperate for the 20,000 pageviews a typical TFA generates). If you want to hear the real buzzing of bees in bonnets, read the threads this search generates.
My views on The Fall are already on record; they rigidly alternate good and bad albums across their entire career, with the bad albums uniformly terrible and the good ones getting steadily better until peaking with Shift-Work (IMO one of the finest albums ever recorded) and getting steadily worse ever since. ‑ Iridescent 23:07, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
I have to admit to a liking for quite a bit of Levitate and Imperial Wax Solvent (whilst generally agreeing with you). I'm going to see them in a couple of weeks time (for the first time in, oh, 15 years?), should be interesting... Black Kite (talk) 23:21, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
I don't think it's as clear as just alternative albums; I think it goes 9or rather, went) in groups of good (great?) albums interspersed with near-mediocrity. The problem is that in the late nieties (I suggest) the periods of near-mediocrity began outspacing the quality output. So now, they something great every now and again, whereas back in the day it was the norm. I mean the 70s / 80s is dottled with occasional dumbassery, but usually just the odd song (can't think of one!) but by the 90s... Marshall Suite, anyone? And it's carried on from their. Not surprising though; Smith can always get great musicians, but he could never replicate the dripping precision, etc., of bygone years. Agree about Shiftwork, btw, whilst noting that it is in a triumviracy, between Extricate and Code: Selfish, which are all of ~quality. In fact, if it wasn't for Oranj, I'd extend the run of great albums either side, back to The Frenz Experiment and up to Infotainment Scan. @Black Kite:, at a risk of WP:OUTING ;) is that the Leeds gig? I was gutted; I had tickets for that when it was originally booked in February, as I was up there, but when it was re-scheduled, I had to lose them. Plus ça change!
Oh don't mind that. Your closure of Ritchie's request is quite maturely worded, unexpectedly fair, and points to an outstanding understanding of how to assess discussions. The discussion of the audience (about why such discussions should not be closed) is a meta issue and is not related to the classy closure. Look at it this way; if there had been consensus already on this issue – that such discussions should not be closed – you wouldn't have done this. This is just a new community perspective, which while being fair, is not against you. Well done again. See you around. Lourdes 00:33, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
(And if you anyway are at it, you might consider correcting "nearly two weeks has passed" to "nearly two weeks have passed". He he. Lourdes 00:36, 9 May 2017 (UTC))
Thanks again, Lourdes. And that typo, sorted. I particularly liked '...unexpectedly fair'!!! As if, I was just far mor likely to condemn him roundly :D cheers! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 10:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
advertising in sandboxes
Latest comment: 6 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion
You reverted a new users sandbox. I have recreated it here sandbox. I think the idea of a large company using a users sandbox to advertise its wares as tricky to justify. However I have removed any flowery claims. Please consider if new users are allowed to experiment in sand boxes. We are short of editors and they need to find out how somewhere. Victuallers (talk) 14:04, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Dear Victuallers It is a curious experience having to explain to an administrator basic policy, but here goes. Please read- and then advise your ?students- to read WP:NOT, WP:PROMO, and everything that includes. Please also see, and pass on, WP:User pages#What may I not have in my user pages? These are all useful links. I understand that there is a perception we are 'short of editors'; let me assure, we are not short of spammers. New users are allowed to experiment in sandboxes, within the above guidelines. As to why a company would advertsise...? Note the diference between advertising and promotion. May I ask why, also, you have decided to approach me on my talk page but not the deleting administrator? I'm sure you would feel at ease talking to one of your peers :) ciao. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 14:17, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
That is my error FIM. Sorry I picked the wrong user. I am having difficulty in understanding why we are so hard on new users. Correction and advice seems like better answers than just reverting. Still it appears I'm learning too Victuallers (talk)
For what it's worth, I would promote eagerly.Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:52, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
For your note at my talk page. I had received the earlier message, but hadn't yet figured out what it meant. Now I do. Insightful.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:14, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
@Sphilbrick: Thanks (I guess!)- on that page I linked to, did yous see the version before it was blanked? (Just making sure we aren't talking at cross-purposes that's all) — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 07:46, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Strong Keep: It is no longer unreferenced. Noteworthy and reliable sources, citations and references have been added to the page Walter van Dyk --Walter van Dijk 19:08 19 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.9.67 (talk)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi apologies if I made a mistake on Lauren Harries. I thought genes reunited was a reliable source. ChocolateCoatedStrawberry (talk) 13:07, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Disrupting discussions
Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I am well aware that users can remove whatever they like from their talk pages. The particular user who deleted my question claimed that they were moving it to the article talk page, which they did not do. So they seem to have made a mistake, and I am asking the question again. Why not just let them delete it if they want to? Why disrupt a discussion between two people you have nothing to do with, which has after all actually managed to substantially improve the lead section of the article concerned? 109.180.164.3 (talk) 09:47, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
May I recommend you continue your doubtless good work on the article, and avoid behaviours that can appear as harassing other editors? You should wait for them to explain their actions to you instead of making assumptions; particularly as they haven't edited nearly three hours. Please spend your valuable editing time her more productively, is all I can suggest. Happy editing! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 10:04, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
They are hardly likely to explain their actions if you keep deleting my request, are they? How about you butt out of a discussion that doesn't concern you and let them decline to answer my question without your blundering? 109.180.164.3 (talk) 20:16, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Notice of noticeboard discussion
Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@Human Rights Foundation: It is a policy-grade requirement that editors whose behaviour is being discussed at that noticeboard are promptly informed of it. That is what Winged Blades etc. was doing. That is not therfore harassment. You are far better advised to join the dscussion at ANI and explain how your edits have been helping the encycloaedia- if you can. Many thanks. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 10:47, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Arredondo_ales
Latest comment: 6 years ago11 comments5 people in discussion
In fact this person Marchjuly first has deleted some logos of companies that i put in my sandbox saying that they are not free coomons but they are used in the companies wiki pages then the second time he simply deleted the complete table i've created and that took me many time to create.Why he just deleted the hole table.itS more than vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arredondo ales (talk • contribs) 14:58, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
@Arredondo ales: I appreciate your exasperation, and I understand that Wikipedia might appear to have some unnecessarilly complicated rules. But the rules we have are there to protect us, and rules about copyrights have to be so stringent otherwise we could be taken to court. You understand that. Now, I see you have been told a few times now by both Black KiteandMarchjuly, on your talk page and at an ANI thread. Please carefully consider what you have been told: that some of our rights to use certain images (especially ones, like logos, which are not taken by individual editors here) are contingent on not over-using particular images. So, if we clam 'fair use' for an image, we are basically promising to only use it in an article. And if we use it anywhere else, we are breaking that promise. See? And, by the way, your repeated blanking of Marchjuly's talk page here and here is also against our rules; doing it again could be seen as disruptive editing and lead to sanctions being placed on your account. Cheers! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 15:14, 17 May 2017 (UTC) — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 15:14, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Ok so in fact he can delete my work and when i deleted his its all recorded i did in purpose because i wanted an explanation why he is allow to delete my work ok for the images it were 4 over 12 by the way but he can not delete my complete sandbox lol, in what world we are living here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arredondo ales (talk • contribs) 16:25, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Meh. Your whole sand box was chock full of images that sholdnt have been there. Of this you were told. And if they had been removed there would have been insufficient left to have demonstrated any value to the encyclopaedia. So it was deleted as a near-/ multiple copyright violation.
@Arredondo ales: I did remove the logos from your sandbox, but I did not delete the sandbox itself or remove any tables. I am not an administrator and only an administrator can delete a page. Just for reference, the administrator who deleted your sandbox is named Bbb23 and the reason given was because it violated WP:U3 (see here). If you want more specific details about this, you should ask at User talk:Bbb23.
As for the non-free logos I removed, I tried to explain to you a number of times why using them in your sandbox is not permitted by Wikipedia's non-free content use policy, but you seemed unconvinced. So, I asked for an administrator to help try and resolve this matter. I did not request that your sandbox be deleted or that your account be blocked; I only asked for an administrator to try and explain things to you. My guess is that Bbb23 took a look at the sanbox and decided, as pointed out above by Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (who is also an administrator), that it had too many problems to be fixed. This does not mean that you can never create another sandbox again; it just means you should try and do so in accordance with Wikipedia's user page guidelines;[Note: Post edited by Marchjuly to strike thorugh incorrect comment. -- 01:50, 18 May 2017 (UTC)]
Finally, blanking the user talk page of another editor, even out of frustration, is something that will eventually get your account blocked if continued, so I strongly advise you not to do such a thing again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:58, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
The user is gone. Hey FIM, you didn't tell me you were an administrator? My condolences.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:31, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
@Bbb23: The part about FIM being an admin was a mistake on my part; I misread the icon in their pop up, so sorry about the confusion. Also, thanks for your help in resolving this. FWIW, I wasn't really out to get anyone blocked, let alone indefinitely blocked. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:56, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: No worries at all. I was just poking fun. FIM would never pass an RfA anyway. Administrators are not allowed to have a sense of humor. Don't worry about the indefinite block. That was my decision. I didn't think you were requesting it.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:20, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On 21 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Elias Beckingham, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 13th-century English royal justice Elias Beckingham was described as being one of only two honest judges in the kingdom? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Elias Beckingham. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Elias Beckingham), 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.
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hac in hora/ sine mora... You don't know it, but you pluck at my heartstrings with your username. And I love it. And I get it. Well, at least as much as a body can, anyway. Thank you for that. KDS4444 (talk) 06:25, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Would you please tell me how do you find so many spammy users? I want to help keeping wiki clean. :-) kindly ping me when you reply. —usernamekiran(talk) 15:23, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
oh. I was hoping at least alchemy would be involved. I am good with WP:SNEAKY, but it doesnt need alchemy either. I seldom lurk in WP:NPR, but its mostly WP:BLP nowadays; thats sort of mundane for me. See you around :-) —usernamekiran(talk) 18:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Palatinate
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I originally changed the link to Palatinate because County of Durham isn't very useful to follow as a link and the Palatinate article seemed a better choice. I added a footnote that I hope clarifies why the Palatinate was so important. Seraphim System(talk) 08:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Indeed. But precision is required in regard of what the Nevilles actually held in Durham. The palatinate was a judicial boundary; their estates were in the county. Likewise, the offices they held were in the palatinate not the county. Tuck expressly says this. The problem is not to make things so 'easy' for the reader that the sources are misrepresented. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 09:05, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Ok, I will clarify this further, thanks Seraphim System(talk) 02:08, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks you for minding my talk page while I was away, I was astonished to see that the banner instructing users to post messages above it was still at the bottom. the cheque's in the post, thanks again, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:51, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion
Since you do some work on relatively obscure English clergy, I was wondering if you might have any idea on where to find a source an a relatively obscure Italian cardinal: Domenico Tosco (being a red link suites the cardnilatial status I suppose). Discovered this gem while cleaning up early modern papal conclaves. Was almost elected pope in 1605, but was too foul mouthed for Baronius' liking. Currently all I have on him is that he was a cardinal who said dick a lot and that there was a portrait of him in a Venetian gallery in the 19th century. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:30, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I've actually not been a fan of the Miranda site: it appears to not be peer reviewed/self-published, and there are some inconsistencies at least in terms of conclave attendees between him and various other sources (I can't recall specifically which ones now). If it is an RS that is great, but the way it has been used on the early modern conclaves has been essentially to generate lists without any useful prose. If either of you have opinions on it as a source, that would very helpful in working through the conclave series. The name changes based on the source, and I've found a few Italian language ones searching Toschi but unfortunately, I'm an anglophone with enough Latin and Spanish to be sing badly, but not much more. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:45, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
I wouldn't use it as a source (well, not for anything beyond a stub), but there are some sources he lists which may help you. I can't help much - 1535 is getting a bit beyond my period and well, Latin/Italian is not my native tongue. I can work in broad picture things for this period, but I'm not an expert on where to find the details for obscure clergypeople. (I'm sure the poor readers are sorry that I CAN find sources for obscure medieval Englishmen...) Ealdgyth - Talk 18:56, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the help anyway! Interestingly enough, my academic background mainly focused on Spanish religious history 1492-1525 (long story how I got there). I just stumbled across the conclave project when I found stubs basically copy and pasting Miranda into Wikipedia, and figured I could at least write some prose based on better sourcing. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Well, if he is Domenico Toschi you might want to try the articles in the French and Italian Wikipedia for starters. That is also the name for him given here. The dates for him becoming a cardinal in 1599, and his titular church of San Pietro in Montorio, appear right - eg [2] - which give some credence to the other dates. No doubt there is some fluidity between Tosco and Toschi. Some sources in Google Books suggest he is also "di Reggio" or "dei Mascheroni". Also this looks interesting. At worst, machine translation may assist, or you might be able to enlist the help of an Italian speaker. Hope that helps. And I wonder if there is any link with Pier Francesco d'Jacopo di Domenico Toschi.
Thanks to you both. I've gone ahead and create as a stub. Knowing the years of birth and death from Miranda's helped me glean enough elsewhere that with the limited language skills I could muster enough for 500 characters and an infobox. It also led me to this, which appears to be the golden goose in the search, unfortunately while I could figure out a way to get my hands on it, I don't have the necessary language skills for it to be too useful. Shame too, he appears to have been a peer in the College with Baronious and Bellarmine: Baronious the historian, Bellarmine the theologian, Toschi the jurist with Practicarum conclusionum iuris in omni foro frequentiorum being his opus. Anyway, enough of my musing. Thanks to you both. Hopefully I can expand it enough that someone with the language skills will be able to come along and expand it later! TonyBallioni (talk) 00:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
@TonyBallioni and Ealdgyth: and 213.205.251.66, many thanks for the interesting discussion. Apologies Tony for being as much use as a pair of sunglasses on a bloke with one ear, but that's also a bit out of my period- and geography- and over-all comfort zone! It's true I did a few Elizabethanrecusants, but that was just to complete the missing ?four biograpgies that were missing from our category Eighty-five martyrs of England and Wales. And I'm afraid they're pretty low grade, just Gbooks stuff and the like. Let alone in Italian! But you've done a (if I can try not to sound dead patronising!) a cool job with that one. As for that thesis / ?book source, have you tried our people at WP:RX? It seems to be only available in 1000-year old European libraries; but WP:RX might havepeople there. As a thought. Thanks to Ealdgyth and IP! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 07:47, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Not patronising at all, Fortuna! You graciously allowed me to commandeer your talk page. I might try RX, Amazon seems to suggest it is a book (and Princeton holds it as well). The concern is that well, my knowledge of Italian is limited to the accented English I hear from the Neapolitans at the local pizzeria! Anyway, thank you for your help, oddly enough the best early modernist I know started out as a medievalist, so I always think it worth asking. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:48, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Please change your signature.
Latest comment: 6 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion
Per WP:SIG#CustomSig, please change your signature, it isn't "easy to identify the username". Hawkeye75(talk) 02:50, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Chris- I suppose you mean it could be interpreted as WP:BEAR? But- this is unfortuante as I am now not in a position to apologise and say it was intended to be a light-hearted throw-away remark, rather than a character assassination with malicicious intent. But never mind.
I think, concerning the question at hand, that whilst my sig clearly follows the customisation protocol (in all three areas), WP:IMPERSONATOR is probaby worth a read :) take care! and thanks again for your comment. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 09:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
I think it's nice, furthermore, "Hac in hora sine mora//corde pulsum tangite;//quod per sortem sternit fortem,// mecum omnes plangite!Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I was at a performance of Carl Orff's Carmina Burina by the National Symphony Orchestra recently, and I thought of you and your user name. I presume it was taken from the Orff work, or from the middle-ages text he used, although the phrase "Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi" has been used in many other places. DES(talk) 18:55, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, DESiegel, that's very kind. Kind of odd being thought about off-wiki, if you get me, but cool too. Cheers! Unless it just reminded you of some WP:NOTHERE indef you'd forgotten about :D
Hope you had a good time. It is, as you guessed, from the Orff. It was in Excalibur (film) when I first heard it, back in the 80s as a kid, I bought a CD (still got the case!), and eventually managed to see it years later. The whole thing *rocks*: beer, women, and gambling. That's the weekend sorted out, eh. Funny you should mention it though, if you look up a bit, another afficionado. I'll keep up the WP:CANVASSsing on behalf of medieval texts and their operetas. Happy Sunday! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 19:24, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, it was an excellent performance. Oddly, Excalibur (film) was also the first time that I heard it. Small world. Thanks. DES(talk) 21:50, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Nordic Resistance Movement
Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Yo Fortuna, hope all is well. I saw that you restored the "fascism" ideology label at Nordic Resistance Movement - thank you. They are seriously scary people, openly neo-Nazist, and I don't particularly want to start researching their own websites to see what they call themselves, but academics talking about them in Swedish media refer to them as fascists and Nazis, so I am confident that the label is relevant. That fascism should be a world-view rather than an ideology was a rather peculiar argument from the other editor, and I don't quite understand what it was supposed to mean... not to mention that fascism is, unambiguously, a political ideology. Anyway, I have noticed a spate of activity around articles about far-right parties and proponents in the Nordic countries recently, both in terms of adding misleading info and white-washing history. I can't say whether the ideological labelling/de-labelling of the NRM is part of that, but in any case it's good to have more eyes on the articles. --bonadeacontributionstalk 12:49, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
No problem, thanks {{u|Bonadea}, yes, although I don't know the subject, the somewhat wild claims made about 'world views' convinced my that WP:CB applied, if in a small way. Hope you're well! — fortunavelut luna 12:52, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
All is well here, thanks. :-) Trying to get some research done during the summer break from teaching... I also don't think I thanked you properly for your help a couple of months ago - there has been one similar incident which was dealt with very quickly, but I think our mutual friend is on vacation, too. Long may it last! :D --bonadeacontributionstalk 12:59, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi Fortuna. I was here about the same issue actually. I dont have much experince with AfD, so I only wanted to ask if it was better to close the discussions, or to relist them. Thanks.
@Samsara: Hi. I hope you dont have any hard feelings for me. I believe that the articles were not noteworthy enough for the an encyclopaedia, thats why i took them to AfD. I would call it "difference of opinion (or maybe philosophy)". See you guys around. :)
PS: It would be easy to find all the nominated articles at User talk:Chevy111. —usernamekiran(talk) 14:40, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi usernamekiran - yeah, about Chevy... she hasn't been online since those nominations were filed. I'm a bit worried that she's been scared off by feeling that her work was not appreciated. Maybe something to keep in mind for next time - I hope we get her back, because she was a rather hard-working and appreciated contributor. Samsara 14:44, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
@Samsara: gosh. I didnt know that. Do you think it would be okay if I send her an email for apologising personally? —usernamekiran(talk) 15:47, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
@Usernamekiran: That is certainly a possibility. Just don't expect an immediate reply, as there may be other reasons she's away. Also make sure that you leave a {{ygm}} template on her talk page, as she's been here for over seven years (and her email address may therefore have changed). Given that possibility, consider additionally leaving your message on her talk page.
Per convention, I will also just ping Chevy111 about our exchange here as I'm not sure the link to her userpage triggers the ping.
Thanks Samsara. And I was going to ask not to mention this conversation to Chevy111. Ad yes, mentioning/linking a talkpage (like above), and {{noping}} dont trigger a notification. —usernamekiran(talk) 18:30, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Ascent to the throne!!
Latest comment: 6 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion
Install {{subst:iusc|1=User:Ais523/adminrights.js}} on your local.js You already posses that! and have a look at this this thread.Who said processes are necessary?Winged Blades Godric 17:16, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
@Blades, yep, sounds fun- in a Palace Coup/ But Might Get Overthrone Tomorrow kind-of-way ;) but the AN link doesn't go anywhere, and I can't find that section in the most recent (?290) archive? — fortunavelut luna 17:59, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Sup, Blades? I am being dense I know :) but I still don't get it. It was just a throwaway remark, based on what the page sez (and which in view of [3] I thought that they would already know!). As for the 'admin.js'...God knows! I installed a load of scripts a while back, wholesale; must've been in there. It certainly doesn't seem to be doing anything! Still don't know why I should've installed it and then looked at that thread. Although I haven't had my cuppa yet: that might help. — fortunavelut luna 07:47, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Oh!.....I assume you've not got the script in working conditions.(It actually encases any user-name/signature associated with any sysop in a blue-shaded box).Anyway the thread looks like this to me.Well....Mis-pings can be interesting!!(Check the wiki-syntax of the section!)Winged Blades Godric 08:04, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes. I realise that. Now. After posting! Here's the screen for your personal elucidation :p :D Admin rights.js Still not had that cuppa. — fortunavelut luna 08:12, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
That's one helluva pic Blades :D brilliant! Well, I suppose it's pure WP:NOTDEMOCRACY in action! — Kingto be... 08:17, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Yeah I get it! (Eventually)- they used 'u|' instead of 'reply|'! Yeah that was fun. "Ascent to the throne" indeed! — fortunavelut luna 08:26, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:36, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
RfA Candidate Poll
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for your comments on the poll. And for the reminder that my motives will be questioned at every turn at RfA if I decide to go for it.
As for the user rights that I requested, in a recent RfA I learned about the Page Mover right, which I previously didn't know about and I really could have used a long time ago (I have done a lot of work over at Requested Moves), and when I was researching it I ran across some other user rights that I thought might come in handy (this is why I got them all at the same time). I had previously noticed pending changes on a couple of articles I frequent and didn't understand why I couldn't review them (even though they were obvious), so that was more of a "if this comes up again I'll be able to deal with it" thing. Since Chris' comment I've bookmarked the pending changes log and will check on it from time to time and will help out there to prevent backlogs developing.
As for rollback, after using it honestly it is very underwhelming. Yes it makes undoing obvious vandalism a one click job (which I thought would be useful), but I'm not that lazy, and the lack of an option to add an edit summary is a real deal breaker for me. I have avoided using it since getting it and really don't intend to much. I'd rather use Twinkle's rollback function or just undo it manually and take the extra couple clicks and have the opportunity to add an edit summary for why I rolled it back in the first place. — InsertCleverPhraseHere 15:15, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
@Insertcleverphrasehere: Thanks for the note. I knew that was extremely mean-spirited, when I wrote that: but the bald truth will help you more than a flattering lie, hopefully! But yeah, to some people, there's no way that would be a coincidence, and you'd never convince them :) but I what you mean. Asking for one just highlights the others. Anyway, you got, and more importantly will continue to get, good advice- I think you know who those guikty parties are-! so get some solid work done over the next few months and I reckon you won't even need ORCP. Best of luck — fortunavelut luna 15:30, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
PS- re. Rollback summaries, if you have a look here, it shows how to add an e/s manually (although tbh that looks so labourious that it probably defeats the object of having such a quick too in the first place!) but there are also some scripts you can install that give you the option. I use one, but I can't find it in my sub-page atm (it might be one of the ones listed there- but I think not- the names don't ring a bell). Anyway, they do the job fine. Take care! — fortunavelut luna 15:32, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
Hi - you and the new editor with a quick grasp of deletion policy edited this after it was closed. Do you want to remove it or shall I? Doug Wellertalk 18:24, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
No Doug Weller; I don't know about the other editor (whom you assess correctly- and compare his and the article creator's user pages, per WP:SHARE))- but I posted before it was closed, and got an edit conflict. Feel free to revert to this version, which is the one I posted in good faith, warts and all and including typos etc. Cheers, — fortunavelut luna 18:30, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: Incidentally- any reason I am solely favoured by this suggestion? I note you have yet to enquire of the before-mentioned party similarly. Cheers, — fortunavelut luna 18:32, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
I kinda got ahead of both of you and reverted it to the version where it was when it was closed. You shouldn't really edit closed discussions after they have closed. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SkyWarrior 18:34, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
I accept that. I only posted to you because I was only concerned about your view, and I think I was right. It was absolutely out of courtesy and valuing your opinion. Not to be rude about a new editor, but if it had been just them I wouldn't have asked. Doug Wellertalk 19:59, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Reference to your comment on my talk page. You suggested to use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. As you can see, I have started two sections in the talk page of the article - Ampalavasi. However, those who are reverting it back are not discussing anything in the talk page, instead they revert it to an earlier less-informative version with erroneous information. It will be better to inform them also. Thank you __पुष्पकः (talk) 14:16, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Replied on article talk. But FYI, those two notices are purely informative / advisory. — fortunavelut luna 14:19, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
I am trying to improve the article. You want to keep an erroneous version. Why is this so? --पुष्पकः (talk) 15:07, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
I am kinda here
Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Hey, fortuna! Sorry for being inactive, it's all cause I am on a long summer break, which restricts me from editing. I am afraid though, tha this period of absence will leave a major mark on my reputation as an editor. I will though return to normal action at 7-12 of August. See you! 109.240.63.137 (talk) 12:24, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
In fact this was my fault that I did not log in. The above info is about me. Cheers, FriyMantalk 12:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Yo the FriyMan :) good to hear from you. Glad you're OK and just having a summer holiday :) lucky. No worries about your reputation. It sits, in a small box, waiting for you, unopened, exactly how you left it before you went away. In fact,like a wine, it improves with age! Keep in touch! удачи! — fortunavelut luna 15:21, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Well see you! Thanks for caring though. It's quite weird and strange that Coffee still have not returned here. Cheers, FriyMantalk 16:21, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
copyvio speedy on User:Floating microspheres
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Yes, I know that the one URL does no thave everything, but almost everything I looked at was copyvio from one page or another. It looks like the entire page is cut and pasted from various sources. No objection to a U5, as long as it goes. Meters (talk) 05:53, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Maybe, Meters, I relied too much on a tool? If so apologies are due you. Would you like to make it a 'multiple' criteria? — fortunavelut luna 06:00, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
No biggie. By the time I realized I should have used the multiple URL line you'd already picked up on it. I found bits of it on paid essay sites, and all over, so it's a real dog's breakfast. I won't worry about it unless it's still there tomorrow. Meters (talk) 06:05, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Dreaded ANI ping
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks TNT :) not as allergic as used to be! — fortunavelut luna 10:34, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
MfD calculator
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hey, Fortuna! During one of the past RfAs I found a tool, which would show your MfD vote accuracy. Now I can't find it. Could you help me to find this tool? Thanks. Cheers, FriyManPer aspera ad astra 20:42, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago12 comments4 people in discussion
I'm not sure how to respond to this: [4]. I mean, that's the textbook definition of a COI, and being paid to create an article. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:31, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
@RickinBaltimore: It's off page one, isn't it?! Apart from just WP:PAID, WP:COI, with side helpings of WP:DOG (OK, that one was cheating), WP:CRYSTAL, and for desert, shall Sir try WP:IDHT?! I was sympathetic to them before we knew who they were- all those deletions notices- but frankly- if they're not even broadcast yet (whoever 'they' are), then a 168-hour holiday at AfD probably calls. They've got some sources- but it's not altogether convincing. What say you? — fortunavelut luna 17:39, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I'd say kick the COI stuff from AN to COIN. A batch AfD based on failing both GNG and NOTSPAM might be worthwhile as well. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:41, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Uh uh. It's wearing. Although that is the WP-equivalent of being passed from one Vodaphone operative to another :D I replied on AN. — fortunavelut luna 17:49, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the response Fortuna, I'm not speechless often but I couldn't find the words to respond to that. Barret Jackman said it best for me though: [5]. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:49, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
That's classic :) 'whaaaaaaat???? He's miming wot we're all thinking! — fortunavelut luna 17:53, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Ha, I spent a ridiculously long time trying to phrase a response but was ec-ed by Fortuna (darnit!) so I just added a terse note about PAID. I don't see how the COI can be much clearer - as you say, textbook example. --bonadeacontributionstalk 17:56, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Ironic! Ow Bonadea sorry about that. I'm sure yours was more insightful than mine. Apologies! — fortunavelut luna 18:01, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
And now this: [6], [7]. Any guesses as to the identity of the new account? I have RL things to do for a bit, so I'll stay away from the sockpuppet theatre... --bonadeacontributionstalk 18:24, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
On neutrality
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello,
I need help in dealing with a user. He/she doesn't seem to understand what's neutral point of view, and is insistent on deleting every non-positive news about Kris Wu and adding only positive news, even though it is sourced and unbiased. He/she also deleted comments that talk about his/her past edits like: [8]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.48.0.203 (talk) 10:52, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your vigilence, 197.48.0.203, I agree. I'm not sure your AIV report will be successful, as it probably couldn't be described as 'blatant vandalism,' but I understand where you're coming from. — fortunavelut luna 11:02, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Special Barnstar
For all the support you've given to me and all other editors for so many years. This is not the end of my journey I will come back eventually. Nickag989talk 17:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Special Barnstar
Thank you for taking time out of your life to make the comments and suggestions to me, they helped a lot! FIGHTER KD 22:58, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
Hello, I appreciate your time and effort to improve Wikipedia. I had spent lots of time to present accurate information of the subject providing links for everything including the newspaper sources. You just went ahead and deleted everything. This is not fair in particular when sources were provided for everything. Please edit text if you find anything overrated, but don't remove all together. This is against growth of Wikipedia which we all like. -- TestBBSR — Preceding unsigned comment added by TestBBSR (talk • contribs) 14:12, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
@TestBBSR: Thank you for your message. Please refer to my previous edit-summary for my detailed reasoning; also bear in mind that the "growth of Wikipedia" does not mean it is a free-for-all for hagiographical, non-neutral, unevenly written, irrelevanttrivia, CV's or quasi-Linkedin pages containing every piece of information ever found on the subject. Incidenatly, if you do personally know the subject professionally, you may well have a conflict of interest that prohibits you from editing the subject neutrally. Thank you, and happy (objective!) editing. — fortunavelut luna 14:20, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, please spend some time and patiently read the text and sources from where they came from. Some matter is sourced from Odia newspapers that you may not have access to. Most of the text written can be found from Internet search. I understand and agree with you on neutrality, etc. while at the same time accuracy is also important. I will revert to a prior version and then try to edit text further as soon as possible. You can also edit to help. But, please have patient and let us be careful of over policing. Let us work together for the growth of Wikipedia. Thanks for the understanding. --TestBBSR — Preceding unsigned comment added by TestBBSR (talk • contribs) 14:46, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Your editing removed many portions of notability of the subject including, editorial board, conference chairmanship, distinguished lecture, etc. which are not trivial. Also the following which the subject has been sincerely engaged for last several years is worth adding as International goodwill activity which is not typical for thousands of Professors in the planet. I can't devote same amount of time as you to go back and forth here. Every matter was sourced, so I am not sure why you have been ruthless here. I have read many Wikipages which have these kind information and tone, so your ruthless action is unjustified.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Philanthrophic Activities:
Mohanty is a promoter of various educational institutes across all levels (from secondary school to doctoral)
in the various states of India such as Odisha and Madhya Pradesh for last couple of decades.
With his undying urge to tap the talents of students of remote villages, he has initiated and sponsored
excellence awards for top performing high school students in rural India. Mohanty has institutionalized
an award called "Saraju-Uma Excellence Award" which is awarded to high-school topper of Lodhachua graampachayat every year
based on the performance in state-level high-school board examination.[1] In the year 2017, he built a state-of-art computing facility
called "Saraju-Uma Dahikhai Computing Center" for computer training of rural population of Odisha.[2] Prof. Mohanty has been one of the primary forces to get sanction of the Government funds for establishment of IIT Bhubaneswar as well as IIIT Bhubaneswar.[3][4] He has also been instrumental to have memorandum of understanding with UNT, USA for international collaboration on research and educational activities. Prof. Mohanty has been an active promoter of the Government College of Engineering and Technology, Bhubaneswar (CETB).
Mohanty has been primary driver of the International Conferences on Information Technology (ICIT)
for Orissa Information Technology Society (OITS) through technical co-sponsorship of IEEE at various
Institutes of Odisha including XIMB University and IIIT Bhubaneswar.[5] ICIT that was initiated in 1996 is considered as one of the earliest IT conference in India when IT was almost non-existent in the eastern part of India.
Mohanty has contributed immensely to the growth of science and technology in the state of Madhya Pradesh
by guiding public and private institutes alike for promotion of academic activities and by mentoring faculty and students.
Specifically, he has been helping various institues of Madhya Pradesh to benefitted faculty and students in terms of scientific
knowledge and international exposure.[6]
Prof./Dr. Mohanty in an inspiring discussion with high school students in Lodhachua village, Odisha, India in 2010.
Mohanty was guest of honor are Ranpur block mahostav (festival) in 2016 to inspire talents.
Prof./Dr. Mohanty inaugurated ICIT 2006 as a Conference Chair with the Governor of Odisha.
Help to provide accurate information. But don't suppress information.
Thanks for the understanding. --User:TestBBSR
Hello, if you think the above Section is promotional then, let us revert back to the version which didn't have the above portion. Please note removing EiC of IEEE periodicals, Conference Chairmanship is not right as these are significant notoriety of the subject. As example refer to the Wikipage of contemporaries like Eby Friedman, Vasant Honavar, etc.--TestBBSR — Preceding unsigned comment added by TestBBSR (talk • contribs) 16:04, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
References
^Saraju-Uma Excellence Award for High-School Students, Odia Daily Dharitri, 17th Aug 2009.
^Saraju Uma Dahikhai Computing Center Inaugurated, Odia Daily The Prameya, 02 March 2017.
Latest comment: 6 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
You've edited this. Is it my imagination or is there a lot of OR in it? Are those your dogs, by the way? Doug Wellertalk 10:05, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: Yes- I think there certainly is. I can't believe I declined a CSD tag but didn't otherwise improve the article, very poor.
Yes they are- at least was- the one on the right is no longer with us. — fortunavelut luna 11:45, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Sad, my wife's 17 year old Yorkie deteriorated so badly last month we had to put her down. I'll take a further look at the A.U.E. article. Doug Wellertalk 12:48, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
That's what happened to ours to. Horrible journey to have to make. On a lighter note Doug Weller good work with the AUE thing there- I was working on the same lines, but ended up getting about three edit-conflicts :) quite pleased I was removing the same as you, almost to the word! Cheers, — fortunavelut luna 12:57, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Lol. I've posted to the talk page, perhaps you could back me up there. I think it's worth an article, just needs a much better one. The article creator is a problem, see Murder of Sarah Halimi and the material I removed. My miniature poodle is almost 15 but still walks two miles a day. She was an agility dog though and had lots of exercise and training and proper dogfood. Doug Wellertalk 13:03, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: We've been lucky though really, because even with stella, all our dogs have lived to ripe old ages, well over their average, and can't ask for much more than that can we? They're troopers through, the old ones! :D You know, I see what you mean about the article creator. Clearly they need to urgently and thoroughly digest OR and SYNTH, with a healthy side of RS. Funnily enough- it wouldn't be so bad if they only wrote about say inanimate things- T34s, perhaps!- but everything they have written so far has been not quite BLPs, but all with a heavy BLP-content: gangs, massacres, murders, etc- which read highly tendentiously, even if that's not how is intended. That's partly the (mis)use of sources, and partly language, I suspect. A couple of their earlier articles show that with a bit of cleanup, they become OK (e.g.). — fortunavelut luna 13:49, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Hello Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi,
Thank you for welcoming me to the Wikipedia community. I noticed my draft article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Applied_Systems, was tagged for "speedy deletion." I do work for the company and therefore have a conflict of interest but I have attempted to write the article as factually as possible. I welcome your feedback on the specific content that is in violation and any advice on how to have an article published for Applied Systems. I would like to point out that several of the equity firms (Vista Equity Partners, Bain Capital, Hellman & Friedman LLC and JMI Equity) that have owned or currently own Applied Systems have existing Wikipedia pages. I understand I can contest the speedy deletion however in reading the how-to help article, it wasn't terribly clear on how to do this. I did not see a "contest speedy deletion" button on the page. Thanks again for your feedback.
Hello @Bennieandthejets:. Thanks for the message. Right. Yesterday at 18:58 I alerted you to the fact that your page was liable to be deleted. From that point the page had a big tag on it with a big blue 'Contest this deletion' button :) that was your opportunity to.... contest that deletion. You didn't? Ah- because at 19:05 an administrator deleted the page as advertising (please see WP:PROMO for more on that). Then today you recreated the page- very similiar to how it was yesterday I think? To answer your original question, that is why there is no 'Contest this deletion' button on your page- because it is a new page. And hasn't been nominated for deletion again. Yet.
Incidentally, you raise another important issue there- if you work for the company you are writing about, then there is not only a conflit of interest, but without declaring your relationship clearly on your user page, it would be a breach of your conditions of use for editing here. Please check out WP:DISCLOSEPAY- I think the instructions are pretty simple? To be honest, one probably should not create articles with which one has such a close connection- even if one manages to impartiality, the suspicion will always exist, I imagine, that the company is merely promoting itself with your assistance. Someone once said, perhaps brusquely, but with an admirable simplicity that rather sums up yours others' positions, that one should perhaps "wait until someone who has no CoI thinks your organisation is notable and writes about it here." Thanks again for the message, Bennieandthejest. I hope you find this helpful; I hope you follow the advice; and I hope you anjoy your time here. Take care, — fortunavelut luna 16:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
And its back ... — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:16, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion Question
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! Thank you for the information you left on my sandbox about speedy deletions. However, I do not see a "contest speedy deletion" button on my sandbox that the information refers to. I read through the guidelines for sandbox use and do not understand how my page was in violation. I am new to editing Wikipedia and appreciate your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astrar22 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Europe Business Assembly
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi!
I'm here to inform you that I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth and honour (talk • contribs) 12:16, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Truth and honour (talk) 12:17, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
O Fortuna, when you pruned the cruft from Cascade School you left a partial sentence and some unsourced stuff - I don't know if you meant to remove that as well or if it was actually salvageable, and I don't feel like looking into the article history and sources myself, so I'll just serve you a small troutlet as a heads-up :-)
Thanks Bonadea; although usually Friday is for fish ;) I think I'm cracking up. Leaving stuff like that, and RickinBaltimore had to stamp on me up there for nominating an entire demographic as a BLP. Ffs... take care! Thanks for the note though. Cheers! — fortunavelut luna 17:29, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Autobiography is a lvl 1 warning, which is insufficient for someone who has already created two autobiographies. Please don't accuse me of 'clear' WP violations. And please don't revert my talk page comments any more. --‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peadorᐐT₳LKᐬ 18:45, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
@El cid, el campeador: No, if they had ignored the previous one, then you up a level. You do not hit them with as many warnings as edits made, as I said, that is pure WP:BITE. You know, less of that would mean less of your edits getting reverted. Carry on, and they will. Problem? ANI is your friend. Possibly. Cheers! — fortunavelut luna 18:50, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
That is not how warnings work. If someone makes an egregious violation, you can give them a warning from 1-4. The user is clearly not here to build an encyclopedia, as evidenced by the fact that they simply created two autobiographies not on the level of COI, but on the level of vandalism. Do we have to wait for them to make 4 or 5 autobiographies before we can ban them? Next time mind your own business, because it is certainly not your role to revert my warnings. You are not an admin as much as you like to act like one. ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peadorᐐT₳LKᐬ 18:55, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
I suggest you desist with the egregious personal attacks. No-one is 'being an admin' or -trying to be an admin'(except possibly for those who rejoice in templating?). I agree "not here" probably applies- but that wasn't under discussion. Yes, you can go from 1-4- but not without the first and something happenng before the last. Otherwise, you omit the first. That's how warnings work. I've told you the way to prevent these discussions taking place- whatever the impression you mean to give, you're going too fast. That's advice, you know? — fortunavelut luna 19:00, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
UFO Kidnapped
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, I noticed that you removed a section of UFO Kidnapped, I think this should be included, because even though yet this section does not have any sources it the information is important for the article. There are lots of articles that do not yet quote sources, but still cite their info, so I think it should still be on the page. I am trying to hire someone to make some YouTube videos comparing both YCDTOTV and UFO Kidnapped, that will show scenes from both shows, but I haven't found anyone yet to do it, and I do not yet know how to do it by myself. Davidgoodheart (talk) 16:33, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Articles for deletion/Dustin Cumming
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I think closing that was a little premature, and I certainly think there was some consensus, outside of the creator and a fairly obvious meat/sock puppet, to get the thing out of mainspace. Any thoughts? Anmccaff (talk) 16:32, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)--I reviewed the disc. and I could not find any concensus to draftify et al.NC (though a NAC) was the best possible close--in the circumstances.Winged Blades Godric 16:42, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
The article Affinity (medieval) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Affinity (medieval) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:21, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Alright Hawkeye7, thanks for that- as it happens, the GA page doesn't seem to reflect a need for any further work to be done to the article? -I am, yours, once again n confusion-! — fortunavelut luna 13:49, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
No further work is required to bring the article up to GA standard; it has been assessed as being of GA standard. Some work would be required to bring it up to A class or Featured. I have some concerns about the footnoting, specifically footnotes 1, 3, 7, 19, 24, 32 and 33 use "pages" or "pp" when "page" or "p" is meant. The citation templates are not consistently used, so we get anomalies like footnote 11. My main concern with the article is that it is entirely about Britain. Indeed, it is in the category "Medieval England", and I tagged it as being about British military history. There is nothing in the article though that says that affinity was a purely English custom that has no equivalent elsewhere, or that the article is purely about England. That would represent a flaw in its comprehensiveness that would doom it at FAC. Hawkeye7(talk) 22:08, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Right thanks for that then Hawkeye7. Glad everything short of a FAC is OK ;) I think we'll leave that for sometime in the future - thanks for the heads up though. I had just wondered why this message said 'On hold,' that's all. Bot problem perhaps? Thanks for your work on it in any case. Cheers! — fortunavelut luna 02:43, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
There's a bad apple in every barrel
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
If there were a police station with 1,200 officers, there would be more than one bent copper among them. If you follow recent desysopings on Commons you wouldn't be surprised. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:48, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
@Kudpung: to be honest, I wasn't that surprised- to have been surprised would have been to ignore your every warning over the last year or so!- but for the purpose of supplying you with the name of the possibly-WP:UPE admin...? — fortunavelut luna 08:47, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Rest assured I thoroughly investigate anything I get to hear about. But bad apples in big barrels are often as slippery as eels in a Fischfass. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:27, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:41, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
August 2017
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Troll blocked [12]; w/ a pretty thorough ANI consensus too [13]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@Raevhuld: I'm afraid exortationsof peace and love don't cut much ice around here when they are accompanied by WP:ABF templates. @GoldenRing:, how much more incompetence and WP:IDHT do we really need to experience? Has this editor not taken up enough editor's time and resources? Is there no end to this sheer timesink? — fortunavelut luna 16:57, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
DYK nomination of Dolly Rudeman
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! Your submission of Dolly Rudeman at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:39, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Congrats! On another note, remember Hyperboreangiant, who BLAH BLAHed something on your talk page? He now has his own SPI. Drmies (talk) 00:08, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Additional information regarding a topic you've previously commented on and expressed an interest in has been posted to that article's talk page found → Here. Please feel free to peruse the information I've provided at your earliest convenience. Any additional input or feedback you might have on that topic would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. — SpintendoTalk 05:48, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
why did you clear my sandbox?
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
you have just cleared my sandbox. Would you clarify, please? Is it a standard procedure to clear one's sandbox with no info provided?--Hh1718 (talk) 18:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Fortfive
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
@51.9.185.74, yes I see what you mean. Thanks for this. An overarching interest in genocides, certainly. But can you be more specific? Thanks for your work here. — fortunavelut luna 06:08, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm afraid I can't, as all of puppeteer's contributions seem to have been deleted. Thanks for pruning the more obvious OR. 51.9.185.74 (talk) 07:07, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
comment
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Well, I guess you are right if you meant that the tone was too formal. Wasn't a template though! Anyways the comment is appreciated even if it would be better in my talk page in order not to add irrelevant stuff to another user's talk page. (my quaintness maybe). Anyways, appreciated. --Kostas20142 (talk) 16:27, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
It was rather in contrast to GoldenRing's comment above yours :) anyway, good luck in the new job. — fortunavelut luna 16:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! For the contrast do not worry, the permission was granted after GoldenRing's comment --Kostas20142 (talk) 16:47, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gregory's Chronicle you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 08:41, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Polemic
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I think we can let sb stew in his own juice for a while now. Nick and I have both finally responded to his jibes, taunts, threats, and demands. He is now walking perilously close to a long block that won't even require an ANI discussion, but neither of us really want to see that happen. ANI would finish him off completely.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:19, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Kudpung, that sounds extremely reasonable. Fiat justitia ruat cælum, &co. — fortunavelut luna 18:25, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I've declined CSD U5 on this. If this was an ordinary user page, no-one would think twice about it. I think I could be persuaded to reconsider. Maybe it just felt too much like kicking a puppy. GoldenRing (talk) 10:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks GoldenRing- kicking three Great Danes or a Basset anyway :) I read the emphasis as being far too heavilly on the various businesses and products (I mean, the business is one thing, but pushing the best line?!)- having said that, I did hesitate myself, and, frankly if one hesitates, I guess that places it automatically in a grey, contestable, non-unambiguous area. Here's to living and learning! Take care, — fortunavelut luna 10:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
I don't mean any particular criticism - just letting you know. I was torn, too, but as you say, if I'm hesitating then I try to make myself not delete. Deletion is forever, while MfD is only a twinkle script away. GoldenRing (talk) 10:51, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Dolly Rudeman
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On 30 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dolly Rudeman, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in the 1920s, Dolly Rudeman was one of the most prolific designers of movie posters and programs for the Dutch cinema, and the only woman working in the field at the time? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dolly Rudeman. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Dolly Rudeman), 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.
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Clifford, 9th Baron Clifford you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Parsecboy -- Parsecboy (talk) 18:20, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You seem like a kind, helpful editor! To continue on it seems as if you would fit perfectly in the newest Wikipedia animal! WikiTiger is a project to help out newcomers in need of assistance and some who have been on for awhile to. For more details and information see WTDB. ♠Dinah♠🎤 13:14, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Userbox
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, Fortuna! No, no, no, I'm not that type of guy. 😂
But maybe with sexy female cousins, you never know. 💏 ;) But seriously jokes apart, I don't want physical relationship with anyone before marriage. Pure conSouls (talk) 14:55, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
.jpg)
Done
Hello, I'm Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 12:00, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Human Rights Foundation (talk) 10:44, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
— PaleoNeonate — 02:00, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Winged Blades Godric 17:16, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Affinity (medieval) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:21, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Dolly Rudeman at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:39, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
; see Talk:Thomas Neville (died 1460) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hchc2009 -- Hchc2009 (talk) 17:21, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 08:41, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 08:48, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
