Misplaced Pages

User talk:Angusmclellan: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:19, 3 March 2007 editDeacon of Pndapetzim (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators39,756 edits →RE: Indeedie← Previous edit Latest revision as of 14:12, 13 December 2024 edit undoMwwv (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers2,230 edits Notifying user about Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Redirects. with periods following "the" (via MassXfD.js) 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Deceased Wikipedian}}
== Aero Action War ==
{{Nobots}}
You wanted to delete my page cause you called it blantent advertising! and yet you let windows have there own page for there vista product i was not saling my game just telling about somthing that will revlotionaize the game industry so i did contst it and yet after placing a artical in the talk page you still deleted it be you didn't even read my contest to your desition alowing a compoy like mircosoft there own page to blantly advertise there new os while me not offering to sale my game in any way you delete the page you even alow EA to have a pgae and each of there games a page lol all i have to say is why delete mine when they advertise there games like black for play station and battlefild 2000 i mean good look for yourself look up ea and look at each page they have for there games!!!!!!!!!! Now you tell me why you deleted mine and give me a very good reson or i will tell every one i know to BAN WIKI! and do what i can to contest then legaly! and i found you have a list of 2006 video games a outrage as to my page being deleted and not theres you tell me why my page can't be here but you alow a page for each game made lol or is it cause you get bribed to keep them on<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]){{#if:{{{2|}}}|&#32;{{{2}}}|}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
]
{{Archive box|
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
}}
<!-- Add new conversations at the end of the page please, or click on the + or new section link at the top -->


== Sad news ==
== Aero Action War Final Stament ==
as i said bribed well i don't care if you disalow me editing no will not do any thing with legal matters i did know you had that page but i will no long use this encyclopedia as the things you said just seemed like you can't talk about your self even thoght you do on your user page very much so having links to other projects you do and im sure other wiki person do the same so yeah you do advertise lol just have to let some one else do it for you or be aprart of wiki seem all to corrupt don't both talking to my acount infact delete it i really don't like wiki but as for the ip i am at work so there is no need to do a ip ban and if you did that would just be another show of how corrupt this encyclopidea is


I just got word from his brother that Angus passed away early on Friday morning. He had been battling ] for some time. I knew him both on and off Misplaced Pages, and am so sad that he is gone - ] <sup>]</sup> 12:35, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
oh yeah and you can remove the tag i made in the product section of Aero pointing to my page i will let you do clean up im done with wiki
: Sad indeed. ]. --] (]) 12:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
: - ] <sup>]</sup> 13:52, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
: How sad. RIP, Angus. --] | (]) 17:40, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
: A terrible loss, you will be remembered and missed. Rest in Peace, friend. ] (<small>]</small>) 18:40, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
: Urf. And cancer robs us of another one... ] - ] 18:56, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
: I'm sorry to hear this. I never knew Angus personally, but I've seen him around many times over the years. He will be missed. ] ] 04:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
: Angus was kind and helpful and did a mountain a good work. We will remember him. ] (]) 21:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)


Really sorry to learn of this. Angus was a bit of a mentor for me when I started editing Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 18:33, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
== Archives ==


: Funeral details - ] <sup>]</sup> 03:06, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
*]: to 30 March 2006
*]: February 2006 to April 2006
*]: April 2006 to June 2006
*]: June 2006 to August 2006
*]: August 2006 to October 2006
*]: October 2006 to December 2006
*]: January 2007 to
* ]: DYK archive


I never knew Angus in real life, but I looked up to him as a Wikipedian. He was always kind and thoughtful. He contributed so much in content and discussion. I wish he were still here. Rest in peace Angus. --] (]) 02:23, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
== Re:] ==


* Condolences to the family. ]! -] (]) 05:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
The edit warring seems to have started on the 29th and has involved many editors. I don't really want to wait until this becomes too serious before taking action. I hope everyone will discuss on the talk page, so they can at least agree on what should be in the article. ''']]''' 22:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
* I just saw this in the Signpost; sad news indeed. Angus was an inspiration to me in my early days editing here, and a fine editor. He will be missed. ] (] - ] - ]) 13:16, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
* So sad to loose another great Wikipedian. All&nbsp;the&nbsp;best: '']&nbsp;]'',<small> 23:15, 5 January 2020 (UTC).</small><br />
* Condolences to the family and the en.wiki community. --] (]) 11:47, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
* Angus was a fine man, a dedicated and insightful Wikipedian. He will be greatly missed. ''']''' <small>(])</small> 23:22, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
* What a great friend and example Angus was to us with his steady, intelligent editing (very sound in Anglo-Saxon matters), his kindly support and his looked-for seasonal greetings. It is hard and very sad to part with him, but it was a privilege to travel here in his company. ] (]) 15:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)


== ] == == '']'' ==


<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#00000; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:7px; max-width:390px; border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 1.3em 1.3em 1.3em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);>
I will be expanding this article over the next few days as I'm able, but in the meantime, I wanted to alert you to it so that you could add if you were interested. --] ] ] 23:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
<gallery mode=packed heights="86px">
:Made major additions, inserted pictures, etc. Would be interested in your input. ] ] ] 15:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
File:Candle (Slava celebration).jpg|alt="A candle"
File:Leucanthemopsis alpina01.jpg|alt="Flowers"
File:Japanese Peace Bell of United Nations.JPG|alt="The Japanese peace bell at the headquarters of the United Nations"
File:Bishkek 03-2016 img50 Eternal flame at Victory Square.jpg|alt="An eternal flame"
</gallery>


<center>We will remember your contributions and your service. Thank you. ].
== Removing warning ==
<br /><span style="white-space:nowrap;">] ]</span> 00:08, 13 January 2020 (UTC)</center></div>


== Precious anniversary ==
But that discussion is about registered users removing warnings from their own Talk pages. ] frowns on that, but it's not in itself disruptive. Anon IPs are a different matter. I'd never say that there's unanimity on anything here, but I'd be surprised if there was much dissent from the view that warnings shouldn't be removed from IP Talk pages.
{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Eight}}
We'll remember you and your work here! --] (]) 08:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
:Just thought I'd add here, didn't know Angus at all, virtually or otherwise as far as I know, no doubt I have benefitted unknowingly from many of his contributions. Anyway came here as a result of searching through the many Scottish political maps he created on Commons, something I often view and use but have no experience in creating - another area where his input is clearly missed. So just thought I'd weigh in to the recognition of his efforts. My wife had lymphoma, must have been around the same time, a wee sneaky invasive cancer (not that any type is nice). Thankfully she survived. As anyone been awarded the Quaich yet? Seems a shame to create it but not to award it. ] (]) 19:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


== The Quaich ==
Ah, in fact the relevant section does include some dissenters, but Rossami has the last word, with a pretty strong argument. (He had the last word; I've just added a comment of my own, rather belatedly.) --] (]) 23:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


:I can't think of what at the moment, but it would be nice and fitting if we could find some way of honoring / institutionalising his memory in some way, perhaps via one of the WikiProjects most associated with his work (Middle Ages, Scotland, etc). Some sort of Angusmclellan (Memorial) award or barnstar? ] (<small>]</small>) 18:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
:I must admit that my memory was that it was explicitly forbidden; in fact I'm pretty sure that it was, but I took a break recently formore than a couple of months, and it's surprising how many things have changed.
:I still think that it's to be deeply deprecated and discouraged. And while I agree that it's ''possible'' to check page histories every time an empty IP page turns up, it's a drag for anyone who does a lot of vandalism-patrolling; most empty pages are empty because they've never been written to. Moreover, placing a {{tl|test4}} or {{tl|test5}} on an otherwise virgin Talk page is just asking for dispute from other editors who haven't looked at the History... --] (]) 23:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


::An excellent idea. I never knew Angus personally, but what limited interaction I had with him on WP was always helpful and extremely positive. How about the "McLellan Quaich" for excellent contributions to Scottish coverage in Misplaced Pages? Just a thought. --] ] 20:37, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
::I couldn't agree more &mdash; but that's a matter of the application of the policy, not the nature of the policy. The same thing could be said of most Misplaced Pages policies: overeager or confrontational editors (including admins) can apply them inappropriately and in ways that exacerbate problems &mdash; and I'm on record concerning my opinion of ]. When an anon user removes a template, I replace it and explain why; only if it becomes clear that this is part of the pattern of behaviour of a persistently disruptive editor do I start to get heavy about it. --] (]) 10:59, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


:::The 'McLellan Quaich' sounds great! ] (<small>]</small>) 12:52, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
== New RfA question ==


::::A very sad loss indeed. Angus was knowledgeable, able, kindly and disinclined to get involved in drama - I echo Brianann's comments above and support the 'McLellan Quaich' idea. ] ]] 16:42, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
A careful reading of ] should help any nominee provide an answer. This is addressed on the policy page. I'm just trying to see if the nominee has actually read the policy, especially as it's seen as very important by Jimbo. If a nominee stumbles on any of my questions, I'm happy to provide coaching to point them in the right policy direction. &mdash;] (] <small>•</small> ]) 15:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
:And perhaps ]; its a harmless question, yet important (sometimes). &mdash; ] 16:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


PS Here's a start:
::]? That's ] ] ] (to pick just three). I still don't think it's a great question. ]. ] ] 21:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
{| style="border: 1px solid black; background-color: #fdffe7;"

|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
:::Well I have to, in a completely friendly way, dissent from Nick. ] is one, not policy but a guideline, and two, more meant to apply to writing about subjects one is personally involved in. For example, it would probably be a ] to edit an article about the company you work for. But ] is policy and has a ]. If a nominee were to paraphrase this section their answer to the question would be spot on. I'm not looking to trip anyone up here. &mdash;] (] <small>•</small> ]) 21:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
|rowspan="2" |

|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The McLellan Quaich'''</font>
::::Well someone tripped over it already, didn't they? Maybe it's not such a bad question after all. ] ] 21:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:::::''/me throws in ]''. &mdash; ] 10:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

::::::Well, yes. ] is a policy, and to back it up, I provided ] (Conflict of Interest) and ] (Autobiographies). They are all inter-related. Editors are not ideally ''expected'' to edit articles about themselves; and we are not dealing with exceptions here. I would be expecting interesting answers for this question. &mdash; ] 10:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

== Why Not? ==
Mostly because so far I've not run into a situation where I ''really'' felt I needed the mop and bucket... In the case of the diff you showed, I was able to just post on their pages (though we'll see how effective that actually was since one party isn't around from the looks of it and the other is off asking ] if it is OK for him to remove content from his talk page). So far pretty much everything I've needed to do I've been able to with just editor privleges. I will say though that when I visited ] a few days back and saw the backlog it was the first time I saw something that I could probably help with more if I had the tools than without, and that at least got me thinking about it.<br>
Beyond that, there is no shrubbery. I've been slumming around ] for the past couple of weeks and the last couple of days I've been getting a good feel for what I would want to do and what I wouldn't want to do if I had the mop and bucket. Maybe it's just me, but I like to have an idea of what I'm doing before I undertake something.--] 20:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
:I might initiate the process in another week or so. I'm still combing through the dark nooks and crannies of ] sub-pages, ], and some of the other policy/admin pages I'm not familiar with. Hopefully I'll have a feel for them all shortly.--] 21:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

==Blanking==

Agreed, not a good idea. However, rather than redirect a Genus to a species I think it is better to point to the page where the Genus & species are, for the user to select the one he wants. In the case of ] there are 2 species to choose from - doesn't make sense to point to only one of them. Have made the change, interested to hear whether you agree. ] 08:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

== Women/ENIAC ==

Thanks. There were a few other pages that used it, too. I hope we got them all. ] 20:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

== I need coffee ==

O_____________O' How did I missed that this was a user page. Thanks for the information, I will urgently make a pause in my patrol to take a good mug. -- ] 21:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

==Mercia==

Happy New Year to you too! There's a map of Mercia that I made for the ] article - is this the sort of thing you were thinking of? ] 17:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

== Re: ==

You mean the ]? I see ] got you another FA. Congrats. Thanks for the link to the ] website, the site looks awesome. Regards, '''] ('']'')''' 12:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

== PBW ==
Thanks for your message, Angus. A very good idea to have an article on this. Unfortunately, I don't have access to JSTOR either, and I haven't come across any published articles about PBW yet. I'll keep my eyes open. <font face="Gill Sans"><font color="green">]</font>''']'''<font color="green">]</font></font> 14:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

== Beonna/Beorna ==
Dear Angus, Thanks v much for your kind remarks. I haven't quite finished with Beonna yet (only started on that a couple of nights ago). I agree most prefer Beonna (and I do) but the forms on coins and in texts vary: this was what I found based on the 'East Anglian Monarchs' category already existing and rather than fiddle (as I am a wiki novice rather) I thought I'd just fill in some articles and leave the outward form for consideration afterwards. I've been leaving any possible revision of the more famous guys (Raedwald, Aethelberht II, Eadmund) for consideration when I've filled in the rest, which should include minor notices for all the others not yet done between Wuffa and Edmund. Hope noone objects to that. Obviously Raedwald needs beefing up to his full stature and that will take careful thought... Meanwhile these tricky fellows in between! Thanks for whatever you're doing. I'll need to beg that reference on the B dynasty from you as I've mislaid it and can only quote J Campbell citing it. Best wishes and watch this (or that) space, ] 13:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
* Cheers Angus for your (live!) note. I have just put the end onto Beonna, hope you like it. ] 14:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

== East Anglia Monarchs ==
Hi Angus, I have just been cleaning up succession boxes on the East Anglian articles and realise (looking at the Monarchs page) that we have been crossing over in edits with different effects! I don't know if you would like to discuss this here or on another page, but it would be as well if we agreed before I go any further. I think we need to discuss several points in the succession dates etc. Points I'd like us to agree about:
1. The annalistic tradition that mentions Wuffa says that he is ruling in 571, not that he acceeds in that year - he should be ante 571. Comment?
2. On the annals basis, Tyttla should be 578-599, not 593, because although there is a Raedwald death annal for 599 there is a duplicate for 624 (probably about right) and so 599 was probably a scribal error for the Tyttla dies/Raedwald acceeeds annal. Comment?
3. Why is Raedwald put at 593 and not 599 as in the annal date? Do you have another source?
4. Why does Raedwald not continue to be king of East Anglia until 624 (the annal date?) Presumably the fact that he gained seniority in c616 or 617 didn't stop him ruling in East Anglia, any more than it stopped Ethelbert being King of Kent or Edwin King of Northumbria? Ive never heard anyone suggest otherwise (but might have missed some recent argument).
5. What evidence, if any, is there that Eni was ever a king of East Anglia? and particularly for his dates? So far as I can see, Eorpwald is Raedwald's heir (hence Sigebert's exile) and succeeds him? I can't see any justification for putting Eni anywhere except as a possible associate king of either Raedwald or Eorpwald, and I doubt if he is ruling during the 'Ricberht' phase because Anna his son is already married and Christian by c630 and Ethilric his (?eldest) son (in the Anglian pedigree) has a Christian marriage about this time. That suggests Eni's family is well-disposed to Christianity and makes unneccessary Bede's implication that Sigebert's recall involved a military conquest. So far as I know this is fairly orthodox thinking, but perhaps I have missed something recent again?
6. I aim to put Hun, Beonna and Alberht all together in one box, with three separate articles - okay with you?
7. Also running into problems in the 770s-780s. The proto-article on Aethelred puts him in the mid780s on numismatic evidence (none that I know of, except that if he is father of St Ethelbert (as in the ''Life'') that is about right, and the evidence is Ethelbert's coin), but the Monarchs page ends him decisively in 779. Comment? The trouble is, I don't know if the original stubs were based on recent publication or coin finds which I haven't seen yet, or on very ancient encyclopoedias deriving from Victorian confident inference! If the former, I defer: if the latter, it should reflect modern scholarship instead. Perhaps your Keynes/Lapidge volume can help?
Sorry this is long, but hope you can help me thrash it out. Thanks! ] may also be interested: Ill post him to this site. ] 19:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


The source of the articles is unclear. Of those which don't say, some are certainly based on the Early British Kingdoms website of David Ford Nash, some may be based on the 1911 Britannica, and others might use the Kessler website. I would recommend that you are ruthless in suppressing anything that seems implausible. I cleaned up early medieval and high medieval Scottish rulers, and retained almost none of the pre-existing material. The list of monarchs needs redoing. I can do the list. I've created a template which I think has the rulers in the right order, although I'm not very sure about Offa. Feel free to criticise:
{{User:Angusmclellan/Template:Kings of the East Angles}}

Regarding the specific questions.
# Wuffa: king from 571 according to Roger of Wendover (Yorke, p. 61)
# Tytla: king from 578 according to Roger of Wendover (Yorke, p. 61); a scribal error seems a plausible explanation for the s.a. 599 entry.
# None of my sources give an accession date for Raedwald more specific than x616 that I can see.
# Yorke has Raedwald die x627, Kirby says before 624 is possible, Keynes gives the range 616x627 (hedging his bets).
# I know of no evidence that Eni was king and your explanation seems eminently orthodox to me.
# I'm all for combining things to make decent-sized articles!
# For the period after Ælfwald, confusion seems the word. Saint Æthelberht's father supposedly royal father is shown as Æthelred? on the template. The list by Simon Keynes in the ''Blackwell Encyclopedia'' does not include him; Barbara Yorke (''Kings and Kingdoms'', p. 67, table 6) does, following Beorna (but doesn't list Æthelberht I, Hun or Alberht); Kirby (''Earliest English Kings'', p. 134) thinks that Beorna was followed by <u>Saint Æthelberht</u>, who would thus have ruled from 779 to 794. Clear as mud. I've tabulated the data:

{|
|Keynes
|Kirby
|Yorke
|- |-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid black;" |<font color="#000000"> Awarded to 'User:xx' for outstanding contributions to Scottish coverage in Misplaced Pages.
|Ælfwald (d. 749)
|Ælfwald (d. 749)
|Ælfwald (d. 749)
|-
|Hun, Beonna and Æthelberht I (acc. 749)
|Hun
|Beonna (& Hun & Alberht
|-
|Mercians?
|Beonna (acc. 758?)
|Æthelred
|-
|Saint Æthelberht (d. 794)
|Saint Æthelberht (d. 794)
|Saint Æthelberht (779-794)
|} |}


I hope Walgamus has some bright ideas on how to present the period between the death of Ælfwald and the appearance of Saint Æthelberht. ] ] 20:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC) :::::Deacon's idea is very fitting and Cactus.man's proposal for a ''McLellan Quaich'' coupled with Ben MacDui's design of such an award are ideal. --] | (]) 19:34, 2 December 2019 (UTC)


::::::Thanks to {{yo|Ben MacDui}} for knocking up a prototype award. Can I suggest using the following image instead: ]. I think it's an improvement because it's a cleaner representation of the quality of siversmith work and celtic imagery typically crafted into the handles.
Thanks so much for this very helpful response, which makes me feel more confident as it is more or less as I have it in Suffolk in Anglo-Saxon Times. I can now press on and be damned for it... In the latin, Wuffa is already in post by 571, so he should be ante 571-578. Tyttla 578-599. Although the annalist-copyist never mentioned Raedwald's accession, he obviously had a sleepy day when he copied out the same thing twice for Raedwald's death, but he had a 599 annal in his source which he never copied out the proper text for. That, I take it, was the end of Tyttla and the beginning of Raedwald. R has to be there well before 616 to be building up his power in Ethelbert's lifetime and getting baptized, sheltering Edwin etc. - and being strong enough to face up to Ethelfrith. I shall put him down for ?599-624, and becoming 'Bretwalda' in 616-7. Really Eni shouldn't be in this list, but I suppose he can be listed as a ?sub-king so people can find him, ? active under R's supremacy. I've done some of this fiddling on the succession boxes. Incidentally the copyist went wrong again later and slipped all the annals for Sigebert etc, out by one event in the series: he still kept the right dates but put the wrong events next to them. I expect he was reading from one of those much-copied texts where the year is not directly opposite the annal entry. Should we really be using the term 'bretwalda???' It used to be frowned upon as term of Anglo-Saxon revisionism to evoke the idea of a crown of Britain. But leaving that aside, (as it will affect everyone else), as to the later period, the Oswald of East Anglia coin mentioned in the Aethelred stub is a ''mistake'', because there ''was'' an O of EA in coins, but he is after Eadmund, a sub-Guthrum ruler in the '''8'''70s (not the 770s). He needs to go out here. So the stubs are full of stuff that just needs clearing out and start again. That's fine. Thanks Very Much, cheers. Hope you like the rest when it comes and let's reconsider everything when some more is done. Why not leave the Monarchs list till last and amend it at the end? ] 02:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


::::::{| style="border: 1px solid black; background-color: #fdffe7;"
== Re:Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Suz Andreasen ==
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]

|rowspan="2" |
I hope you didn't take my earlier mention of this AfD at ] to be questioning your decision to close in any way. I agree with your decision, but wasn't sure how to handle what seems to be a new user who was making, IMO, a pretty serious mistake. This is a user who filed an RfA the day after making those sock comments. I wasn't sure if it was an issue that I should take directly to him, so I decided to go to ANI with it. If that was the wrong forum to bring a discussion of the matter, I apologize. --] 21:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The McLellan Quaich'''</font>




== THANKS AGAIN==

Hi Angus,

Thanks so much for all that info - great way to write and edit. I just could not stomach more trips in and out of word. I will use the sandbox. GREATLY appreciated!!!

Cheers,
Archiemartin] 16:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

== Penda article ==
Dear Angus, looking at the Penda article (preparing for Aethelhere) it says at note 52 (in text) that Bede says Penda was decapitated. I can't find this, can you? In HE iii.24 he is interemtus or interfectus, but not obtruncatus or decapitatus. Do you know if it is elsewhere in Bede? ] 05:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
*Cheers for that Angus. Article now provisionally written (AEthelhere), will ignore the headless Penda as not relevant here. Your vetting comments if any will be welcomed! ] 09:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

==your language templates==
please, please stop creating these {{tl|lang-ISO3}} templates. It is insane to create separate templates for the 5,000 or so languages in ISO. It is perfectly sufficient, and much cleaner to just use {{tl|langWithName}} directly. What you are doing is creating a crapload of templates that do nothing else but transclude another template. Which is a bad idea already for concerns of server load. I would even recommend scrapping that too, and spell out the langauge link in the text, as in
:<nowiki>]: ''{{lang|fr|langue}}''</nowiki>
] <small>]</small> 10:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
:why, thank you (I expected a "volley of argument" so to speak, hence my somewhat polemical approach, sorry) -- I think it will be enough to deprecate them, as I did on {{tl|lang-de}} already; if the deprecation doesn't raise too many eyebrows, we can always send a bot after them for replacement later. regards, ] <small>]</small> 10:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
::no hurry with the deleting, I think, deprecation is fine. People may still like to subst: them. We should look for an overall solution on ], and then send in the bots to deal with all of the templates alike. ] <small>]</small> 11:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi there! Regarding and other similar edits: could you, please, refer me to where this was discussed and the decision to deprecate <nowiki>{{lang-xx}}</nowiki> templates was made? Thanks.&mdash;]&nbsp;•&nbsp;(]); 15:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

:Try ]. The argument convinced me. ] ] 15:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
::Umm, that's where I have already looked, but I don't see much of a discussion there, let alone a consensus for the templates to be deprecated. All I see is Dbachmann's proposal to get rid of the lang-ISO1 templates with no feedback. If that's the only place where this issue was been raised, I suggest reverting the deprecation notices that have been placed in the <nowiki>{{lang-xx}}</nowiki> templates so far and waiting until a consensus is reached. Deprecating templates before anyone had a chance to say anything seems just... wrong. Thanks.&mdash;]&nbsp;•&nbsp;(]); 15:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

:::Feel free to revert the changes. I do not feel strongly about the matter, apart from the certainty that creating many of the tagged templates was an error on my part and that the alternatives were deprecation or deletion ({{tl|db-author}} says "created in error" which they were). There's no danger of an edit war. I spend many of my working hours arguing about (and usually against) the re-invention of the wheel, and the creation of unnecessary custom solutions to problems, so I really do not want to do things like that on Misplaced Pages. Thanks, ] ] 17:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
::::Thanks. Just so you know, the only reason why I ''will'' revert the changes is because the templates are in fact used by the community, and there has been no consensus so far to deprecate/delete them. Just procedure, nothing personal. Cheers,&mdash;]&nbsp;•&nbsp;(]); 17:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

== AEthelred of East Anglia ==
Hello Angus, sorry to keep bothering you, but... The problem with that AEthelred of East Anglia page was that it was for the guy in the 870s who just has coins, after Edmund and before Guthrum: and Not for the legendary father of AEthelberht KM, who fl 760s-80s if not merely mythic. So I have moved the existing page (stub) for Aethelred of East Anglia to a new title Aethelred II of East Anglia, and am about to create a new one for AEthelred I of East Anglia for my 8th century geezer. Unfortunately when I check this (AEthelred II) for links etc it comes up with your template and a long list of dates in the 770s etc, which are to the wrong page. here doesn't seem to have been a page for the first AEthelred. Sorry about this, not quite sure how one fixes it. But I'll go ahead and make my page for AE I now. Thought Id better let you know. Best, ] 12:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

* Thanks for that. Ive sorted them I think. Could you help a little more with the template? I think I want to express that Offa is overlord (but not exactly Bretwalda) in East Anglia through the 760s until 796, and similarly for Coenwulf, Ceolwulf and Beornwulf, parallel with the reigns of Aethelred I, Aethelbert II, Eadwald and AEthelstan (who should commence c 821). Is there some way of doing this in the boxes at the foot of the articles? Could you set up an example for Offa, for instance, through the reign of AEthelred I, and then I can copy and adapt for the others? I get the impression that you are the man for templates! Thanks, ] 14:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

* Brilliant and so simple! Thanks again ] 14:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

== Non-admins with high edit counts ==

I noticed your comment on Durova's talk page, where you linked ] as your source.

Just as a FYI, ] serves the same purpose as your intention, without all the admins listed (of course :P), and with some comments regarding whether this user wants to be nominated. Just thought you'd like to know :) Cheers, '''] <sup>]&nbsp;·&nbsp;]&nbsp;]</sup>''' 06:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

== Oengus mac Fergusa ==
Dear Oengus, just looking at this article as I had a slight interest in this fellow, noticed the reference to Isabel Henderson's '''Primus inter pares'': the St Andrews Sarcophagus and Pictish Sculpture' is to Taylor op cit, which is elsewhere under another article in this list of references. In fact this paper originally appeared in Sally M Foster, Ed., The St Andrews Sarcophagus - A Pictish Masterpiece and its International Connections (Four Courts Press, Dublin 1998) ISBN 1 85182 414 6 (hbk) (or 4, pbk), 97-167. I remember because she spoke at the conference for a long time, and it was very illuminating. Possibly that ref is worth citing? I suggest rather than wading in and doing it myself as the article seems to be largely yours and I don't wish to tamper unnecessarily! Yrs aye, ] 07:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

* On further search I see you know all about it. These articles are beautifully written and amazingly informative, thanks! I will interefere no more. ] 07:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

::Thanks very much for catching this! It's the kind of cut and paste blunder that I'm very unlikely to be picked up unless it is right away. ] ] 10:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

== Question ==

I just received your welcome. I've been overloading my senses at Wiki since I found it these past two months and have only gotten brave enough to correct typos. I look at your credentials and mine are simply 50 years reading encyclopedias and dictionaries like they were novels. I admit a favoring for the flavor of history but that takes me to many other spheres. I worked at the UIUC when Netscape was still Mosaic and HTML had about 30 commands. I've been on hiatus and out of the loop since 2003 but I'm looking forward to sharpening my skills in the sandbox. So you are my go to guy? I would like to spend some time working with the deletion project if it would be helpful. But I could not figure out how to add myself to the list. Can you help me? Will I be notified of new additions or do I check back periodically? Thanks for making yourself available to us new folk. ] 08:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)MarlaB

== David I ==

Angus, the contribution was not precisely *scanned* -- the source is simply my Master's Thesis. I edited it down, attempting to turn it into a readable form. I included endnotes and a bibliography. It is, essentially, all of the information I managed to track down on the subject of king David I during about six months studying him. I have since moved on to other subjects, and have little use for a paper on the subject. It is not technically copyrighted, and should be in the public domain. I hope it will be useful; feel free to do with it what you wish. :o) ] 19:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm very glad it will be of some use. Sorry about the length -- you'll be happy to know that I edited roughly half of the paper out already. (I suspect if I had simply posted the entire thing, you wouldn't be nearly as understanding.) It is true that the historiographical section is still a bit long -- it was also the most time consuming to produce, as you might imagine -- but as you say, there is material in there that might easily be shifted around, especially the background material on Malcolm Canmore, Saint Margaret, Alexander I and Edgar I.

Oh, and don't worry about the questions! I'm only too aware of the problem of plagiarism and copyright infringement; my students are prime offenders, (the little bastards). Misplaced Pages must face those problems, and vandalism, in order to earn a reputation as a trustworthy source. Just look at what happened to the ], today. The ''Battle of the Gay Poopers'', indeed. Ugh. ] 21:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

== AfD notifications ==

It is generally considered civil to notify the ] creator and any main contributors of the articles that you are nominating for deletion. To find the main contributors, look in the ] or ] of the article and/or use . For your convenience, you may use <nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:]|''Article title''<nowiki>}}</nowiki> (for creators who are totally new users), <nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:]|''Article title''<nowiki>}}</nowiki> (for creators), or <nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:]|''Article title''<nowiki>}}</nowiki> (for contributors or established users). —] 05:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

:True enough. My apologies. ] ] 09:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

==]==

Hey there; just going to drop a line on the above and some other obscure stuff to whet your appitite but I see you are already working on some related topics. Let me know! ] 16:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

== RFCU procedural question ==

I responded to your query that you placed on my talk page. My response can be found ''']'''. If the message isn't on my talk page, please see the ] for the time period of your original message. Feel free to post any further comments on ], and I'll respond to you as soon as possible. Cheers, ''']''' 11:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

==Deletion==
] may interest you, since you nominated one of the bundled articles for deletion before, albeit unsuccessfully. ] 14:13, 26 January 2007 (UTC)‎

== ] ==
This page has been moved to AfD at ] following discussion on its talk page. Thought you'd like to know as you put up the prod. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 14:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

==Socktastic==
what does '''Declined''' mean?--] 17:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

== ] ==

Just started an article on Olaf the White's father... Know anything about this fellow? --] ] ] 20:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I believe the traditional view is that the Halfdan you're talking about, the Halfdan of the ] was the son of ] though of course that's controversial. I've seen him also conflated with ] but I'm not sure if there is any textual justification for this; they seem to have led quite different lives.
Guthred seems to be a very mysterious figure and beyond his formerly slave status, I don't know much about him. Have you read Bernard Cornwell's ''Lords of the North''? He is a major character.
I think the book "Viking Empires" which is cited in ] has some good discussion of the Kingdom of Jorvik generally. I'll take a look and see what I can find. Why don't you email me so I have your address; that way I can see if I can scan some pages and email them to you. ] ] ] 20:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

== AEthelstan Half-King ==
I haven't looked yet as I'm a bit tied up with Sutton Hoo, but wasn't he the one who went off with Edgar's intended bride? She sold Stoke (the over-river half of Ipswich) to Bishop AEthelwold when he was re-endowing Ely in 970, and as Stoke has high ground and a clear view down the Orwell, a dedication to Augustine, and is next to Bourne (Cyril Hart's preference for Burna, St Edmund's place of consecration in 855), we like to infer (!) that she got it from Aethelstan and he had it as a royal estate inheritance: so, possibly a dwelling for him next door to the big harbour. God knows how to reference that! He's slightly late for my expertise but I'll gladly contribute if I can. Hope you're flourishing, ] 19:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC
:Apologies, that was Aethelstan's son, an East Anglian ealdorman. ] 11:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

== Thanks!! ==
Hi Angus! Thanks so much for note. It meant a lot to me. I worked diligently on researching that article and the initial rejection broke me, but I'm back! I'm beginning to understand the Wikipedian community and I've grown as a writer because of the initial ban. Odd as it may seem, I'm grateful for the learning experience and have grown to admire this community. I've started article # 2, let's see how that goes. Thanks again and cheers - au revoir et merci! Windwall ] 03:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

== rvv ==
My apologies, in fact, I was reverting the entire article, removing the (unnecessary IMHO) mention about history in the whole process, but my connection is slow at times and you reverted while I was still checking if I handn't forgotten anything. I didn't notice till it was too late... Sorry about that and thanks for heads-up, I'll double check everything from now on :-) - ] 16:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
PS: merci d'avoir écrit en français :-) - ] 16:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

== TfD nomination of Template:{{ucfirst:HistSource}} ==

] has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!-- Tfdnotice -->. This is related to the recent Catholic-link TfD. --] 23:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

:Looks like a ] G4 to me! ] ] 00:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

==Cerball mac Dunlainge==

Hello Angus. Yes, any red links on those articles are ones I hope to create soon, if only as short stubs. But don't let that stop you from having a go if you want; love to see what you do with Brega. One particular Irish king I wish to focous on presently is King Cerball mac Dunlainge of Osraige 842-888. He is far more significant and interesting that I ever guessed, especially for one from such a previously obscure kingdom. Wait and see! ] 21:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

==Re:Déja vu all over again==
I will be trying all options, until we get anywhere. However I am afraid that none will satisfy majority, and thus the current minority who supported Jogaila and managed to hijack the article into it's current name and now of course opposes anything that is not supported by 'majority' will tryumph - a sad case of victory for wikilawyers and miniority POV pushers :( --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 00:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
: Piotrus, I'm not sure those terms are helpful to the discussion. :/ But I'm curious, what ever happened to the idea of mediation? I remember there was a start on it, and then I got busy with other projects, figuring that someone would let me know if the RfM ever came to fruition. How did it get stalled? --]]] 00:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::Probably died after long tortures ], and is currently being staked ] and exorcised ].--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 00:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

No, ] is just sleeping. Essjay checked it over and said that it was more or less in order. I can dust it off if you like. All together: "voting is evil!". It's what got us into this situation in the first place. ] ] 00:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

::: (edit conflict) Sorry, I looked at all three of Piotrus' links, and couldn't find any mention of a Jogaila / Wladyslaw II Jagiello mediation? The pages ''do'' show that there are still some fundamental difficulties with communication, but all that tells me is that we really have nothing to lose by attempting a good faith mediation. Yes, Angus, I'd like to take you up on your kind offer. :) --]]] 00:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

::::We can try mediation, but we can also simoultanesly try RMs.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 00:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

::::OK, I'd suggest that "involved parties" should be kept to a minimum. I'll add you, Piotrus, myself, and I'll check with Irpen. This might be just the thing to get Ghirla back too! (I appreciate that not everyone here would welcome that quite as much as me.) ] ] 00:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::::: I recommend announcing the intention to start the mediation at ], and asking there who is interested in participating. --]]] 00:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I will as soon as I eat something :) Perhaps you could stub ] and ]?--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 01:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The mediation seems stalled. Oh well. Would you support either Jagello or Jagiello? What other names would be acceptable for you? --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 23:03, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

== Jogaila ==

Thanks for notyfying. --] ] 13:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

== Random Smiley Award ==

<div STYLE="clear:right; float:right; width:300px; background-color:#f9f0C9; border: 1px solid #888850; padding:2px;">]<small>For your contributions to Misplaced Pages and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted <B>]</b><BR>originated by ] <BR>(])</DIV>

--] <small>('']'')</small> 13:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


==Re:Jogaila==
All I can say is, oh dear. I'm not sure what I should do about it. BTW, I see you're working on Columba and Robert II; are these still ongoing? '''] ('']'')''' 18:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

==Marcomer, Sunno, and Genobaud==
Angus, thanks for your kind reaction. It is just so fast I haven't had the time to give you a detailed reaction, but I promise I will do that later today on the ] page. Johanthon, 02-02-2007. 12:12hrs

==]==

I'd welcome your comments at the above FAC. I thought it would be a walk-in, but the unexpected lodging of a request for mediation in the middle of the FAC process seems to have caused some people to "object", though I see no offence to the criteria on that account (by all means respond that way yourself, by the way; this isn't canvassing but a request for informed opinion on the actual article). What I long for is someone who knows about history to give a response to the article itself. I know this is only a personal consideration, but I have buried myself in the subject for the past several weeks and might not be able to respond in so well-primed a way in a future FAC. It's not anyone else's concern, but I'm really up for this at the moment and would like to get the FAC out of the way, leaving people to discuss the title in the future, as they probably will do forever. (My view on the title is that even a group of Medieval historians wouldn't presume to mediate a definitive title for this king, so any Wikipedian who volunteers to do so is certainly brave: this king has never had a definitive name, as the article and the books on him show. I'm thinking of writing a book on him myself in the medieval kings "Choose Your Own Title" series.) ] 14:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


==Cbladey==

Thanks for your note and for visiting my talk.
Good to see your interests- For a while I specialized in the Archeology of Britain (I started in London in the 60s with the Guildhall Museum). I went to Durham University-studying there Anthropology, Archeology and History. I settled out specialist in things Celtic due to my re-location to Munich and its proximity to early sites. Then on return to to the USA I found the best use of my skills to be in teaching and writing about Irish Studies- specializing in the Earlier Periods but becoming a generalist- that means mastering the messy politics... etc.....I took a detour into politics to prepare for teaching but have been in the relativly fresh air for a good while now having gotten my education and failing to convince politicians to embrace culture! I tend now to be more interested in celebrations, food ways, folk music and customs.

I have specialized in St. Brigid of Kildare primairly because I saw a need to gather all of the ancient or at least the older sources and make them availiable to those who were interested in the baseline information. It seems the world is awash in "new revelation" which is the best way I can describe it, so perhaps my work has a utility. No problem with "new revelation" if it is properly souced. I notice that there are indeed two Brigid pages which seems good. Saints lives are interesting in that they can be many things. The Brigid page (christian) needs a bit of work-repeats itself a bit- and there is some information which is not there. Association with plants....status of relics....and a few more bits. Some day I will see what I can add from my book. Trouble is - space limitations but there are some short things which might flesh out the article just a bit.

Misplaced Pages is a bit overwealming at first. I find much of the heavy process and beurocracy discouraging. But, if there is time I will see what I can contribute.Cbladey 19:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

***Thanks for your support. As I get the time I will take a look at Patrick and Brigid. I am good for the folk custom aspect of saints- celebration etc...as well as for relevant poetry and verse.Cbladey 20:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

== Thanks ==

Thanks for following through on the Piedmont Bible College AfD. That's only the second one I've tried, and I obviously did something wrong not to get it listed properly. Listing it in the first place was also my mistake, but an honest one. I've apologized to the author. All the best,] 20:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

== David I ==

I'm currently planning on finishing the David I article. I see someone beat me to it. Not sure what to do now. The added text is very significant, but not that much of it seems to be written in a style appropriate to a wiki article. Virtually all of the "Political Context – Malcolm, Margaret and the ‘other’ Canmore kings" looks discardable, for instance. I think some can be saved with some editing ... it certainly helps the historiography and personality sections. Do you think I should still proceed as planned? '''] ('']'')''' 22:09, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

: What should I do? I guess I can look to see what I can incorporate or something. The style is not very encyclopaedic ... and ignoring some factual inaccuracies (such as a confusion of Causantín, Earl of Fife as a ruler of Moray), the historiographic section is fun to read and interesting at times. Need your advice on how to waste my time. Advize! '''] ('']'')'''

:: The author is an intelligent chappie ... some nice observations. I was planning on doing a similar thing with my dissertation on Cranes and Pygmies (which got a good first), but like this article, it reads like a paper rather than an encyclopedia article. Anything salvaged ... and it'd be a shame not to salvage lots of it ... has to be edited heavily in order to make it encyclopaedic and self-containing. Also, moving lots of it would rob the contributor of the credit. Any thoughts on that? Ignoring that, when I finish, we can start salvaging it. For instance, I'm gonna have to create sub-articles to get my article down to size - e.g. early life, davidian revolution. Other sub-articles could be create from this chappy's contribution ... such as ]. We could have a template on the bottom like on the ] article or the ] article. Regards, '''] ('']'')''' 22:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

::: There are two major sections which need to be salvaged, the Margaret bit and the Historiography of the reign of David I part. The latter is most of the good part of the essay. I'm thinking that when I'm finished we should moved the ] article to ], paste my preprepared article on the redirect, and edit the new historiography article to be both encyclopaedic and including only the historiography, finding new homes for the rest as we wish. Please tell me if you approve of this suggestion, if you think wider community discussion should take place first, or if you have any other suggestions or suggested modifications to my plan. Regards, '''] ('']'')''' 01:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

:::: OK, thank you very much for your counsel. Best regards, '''] ('']'')''' 01:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

==Regarding the AfD==
Message by Mobile 01 on ]:

{|border=1
|
From - AfD etiquette
:* Do not message editors about AfD nominations because they support your view on the topic. This can be seen as votestacking. See ] for guidelines.

At 18:03 on 3rd Feb 2007 ] notified ] about this AfD

At 18:34 on 3rd Feb 2007 ] begins editing this AfD
The '''Speedy Keep''' introduced by ] would appear on the surface to be a solicited vote.
] <font size=2><font color="Green">]</font></font>] 03:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
|}

Here was my repsonse. As you see, I have asked her to remove these comments, and hopefully she will. ] (]) 11:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

:I left a note at the AfD. I don't want the comment removed. ] ] 11:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

::Can I ask why not? What did you think of my response? ] (]) 12:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

:::Your response was fine; the "hit list" thing isn't news to anyone, but it's never a bad thing to mention it, what with Morton having "accidentally" listed this AfD on someone else's page. Mobile 01's comments don't bother me, and make her look less than brilliant. "Do not message editors about AfD nominations because they support your view on the topic." What is my view? So far, my canvassing has resulted in two or three keeps and two or three deletes, and I haven't given an opinion either way. ] ] 12:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
::::Fair enough, best wishes. I have never met you before, but I am sure we will see each other again. Have a great weekend. ] (]) 12:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

== Earl of Northumberland ==

Angus, do you know any reason why ] and ] should be separate articles? ], after all, is just a Latinization of ]. '''] ('']'')''' 00:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

:] is just one county in the old ]. ] ] ] 14:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

:: Well, there you're confusing the modern day county with the historical region; Northumberland means "land north of the Humber"; Northumbria is the Latin version. Today ] is just one region in the old ]; but you don't have to use the term "Moravia" just because of that. '''] ('']'')''' 14:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

::: Perhaps not, but you all earls can be referred to as "of Northumberland"; e.g., Robert Bartlett calls Waltheof and Siward "earl of Northumberland", and avoids the term "Northumbria" altogether; "Northumbria" is one of those annoying Latin importations that double up on an existing word. A like example is "Angles", which makes the unwary think "Angles" and "English" were once different concepts. '''] ('']'')''' 23:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

== T-34 article and sources ==

Ah, I see. Thank you. I do grow a bit suspicious of any sentence which contains the words "widely regarded" while it does not cite its sources, hence my edits of late. ] 13:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

== Berig ==

Emailed him but haven't heard back. I think he was angry that I didn't jump in but I was actually out of town and didn't know about the ruckuss at all until late yesterday. ] ] ] 14:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

== Re : Charles Scripps ==

The version I deleted was only one sentence long. - ''Best regards'', ] 22:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

:Thanks, that's good news. ] ] 22:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

== New Nordic articles you may be interested in ==

*]
*]

--] ] ] 23:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

== Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Raven banner ==

FYI... your input would be appreciated. ] ] ] 23:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

==]==
"Biography of Living Persons Administrators ("BLP Admins") carry out a specialized, narrowly tailored administrative role within Misplaced Pages." Please see ] to offer your thoughts on this proposal. ] 03:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

==Lumacurve==
15:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)15:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I work for the Lumacurve Company and have authorization to use this information on Wiki.
How can I become authorized to put our companies information onto Wiki?

Thanks, Liz

== Julio Brouwer ==

It's gone, thanks for the tip. ] 19:32, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

==Thanks!==

Thank you for undeleting my ] pic. I`ll remember not to do again such a n00b mistake xD--] 02:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

== Articles ==

Congrats, nice work. I'll see what I can do. I actually love ballet and went to ] last night to see ]'s ''La Slyphide'' and ]'s ''Rhapsody'', both of which were delights for the eyes. But I'm not so up on ballet history as I am for opera. Cheers, ] <sup> ]</sup> 10:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

:Created a redirect, changed the citing format to the standard one used for Grove Online, and added a few inline cits. Cheers, ] <sup> ]</sup> 18:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

==Request for Mediation==
{| class="messagebox" style="width:80%"
|- |-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid black;" |<font color="#000000"> Awarded to 'User:xx' for outstanding contributions to Scottish coverage in Misplaced Pages.
|]
|
|A ] to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, ].
::::::::''For the Mediation Committee,'' <span style="font-family: Verdana">] ]</span>

<small><center>This message delivered by ], an automated bot account operated by the ] to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please ].</center></small>
|} |}
<div align="right">''This message delivered: 16:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)''.</div>

== Somitho's RfA ==

Thanks for your message, Angus. I was pleased to know that it wasn't just me who found it all rather bizarre. It's rather unfortunate that people nominate candidates who have no real hope of passing because it inevitably leads to bad feelings. I understand wanting to nominate people you like but it's just not fair to lead inexperienced people to believe they have a shot at RfA when anyone who hangs around RfA these days would know that someone with less than 400 edits has no chance. Unless we enter the Twilight Zone. :) ''']''' 18:20, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

== The Carricks and the Tyrones ==

Just writing to see if you know about Barrow's new belief regarding the decent of Robert I. The theory is that Nicholas, the son of Donnchad mac Gille Brigte, earl of Carrick, married the daughter of Niall Ruadh O'Neill, giving the following genealogies:

:Niall Ruadh O'Neill
:*Brian mac Neill O'Neill
:**Domnall mac Brian Ó Néill, the kinglet who arranged the crowning of Edward de Brus

:Niall Ruadh O'Neill
:*x inghean Neill Ruaidh O'Neill
:**Niall mac Donnchada, earl of Carrick
:*** ''Marthok'' inghean Neill, countess of Carrick
:**** Robert I, King of Scots & Edward, Lord of Galloway/Earl of Carrick

This makes Donal O'Neill the granduncle of Edward, which would help explain Edward's probable fosterage with him. Anyways, Barrow arrived at this conclusion after consulting with a genealogist named B. MacEwen. It's in the new edition of his Robert Bruce book. It would also potentially make King Robert the great, great grandson of ], as Niall Ruadh's wife was his daughter. It was mentioned before the publication of Barrow's new edition. I haven't yet decided whether or not I buy it. "Nicholaus" seems a little far-fetched a name for that cultural millieu (... who else would have had that name?), and the idea that "Nicholaus" was just an attempt to culturize the foreign name "Niall" seems a pretty good explanation. On the other hand, the argument has convinced Barrow and does have its strengths. If true, it does make you wonder how "Scottish", as opposed to trans-channel, the Carrick world view really was. '''] ('']'')''' 21:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
: By "all new", I hope you understand virtually the only differences are more illustrations and this genealogy part. He's left much of his outdated stuff in there, not that there's much of that though. It is a very important book still. BTW, do you have or know where I can find a full, high quality picture of William Brassey Hole's mural from the Scottish National Portrait Gallery? It has loads of individual profiles that could be used on wiki, as the copyright has expired. In case this artwork ain't familiar to you, it's where the picture in ] comes from. Regards, '''] ('']'')''' 22:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

:: Yeah, I don't really no what to say to her now; I'm prolly best keeping my mouth shut. BTW, almost finished ]. Just need to 1) reintegrate paragraphs after previous shift around from chronological to thematic order and 2) shorten it and open sub-articles. What kinda lenth d'you think it'd get away with during an FA? 80 max? 70 max? 60 max? '''] ('']'')''' 00:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

=="lesser English dialogues"==
Fair enough. Thanks for the tip-although you talk to him. He can't be serious! ] 23:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

== Source Canvassing ==

I've started a discussion about the phenomenon of "Source Canvassing" at ] with the idea of coming to a common consensus about the larger issue and documenting it on that page. Any input or ideas you want to contribute would be helpful, thanks. -- ] 19:48, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

== Your talk page warning for ] ==

Please let the editor who tagged the page make the warning. ] 11:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

==Hi!==

Let me know what you think of this ]; am I going into too much depth, wandering too much from other Year's in style? ] 17:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

:Hello Angus, and thanks for the thoughtful (as always) reply. I did'nt think of the copyright issue! Thanks for bringing it up. I'll continue, but will keep this in mind, and hopefully should trim it in time. As for the infinite ban idea, it arouse out of an ever growning anger at the number of Wikipedians driven off the project by both trolls and abusers. A way of blowing steam, to be sure, but a serious issue nonetheless. Looking forward to catching up on your latest work! ] 10:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

==]==
Hello There! Thank you for your contributions to that page. However, ] was blocked for 1 day because of his revert war with me in that article, and has being clearly warned about such a disruptive behavior here in Misplaced Pages. You acted in good faith to revert the article and remove a whole section that so far more than 3 Wikipedians have already agreed that doesn't belong to the article, but unfortunately your edition was not respected. I have already informed the respective administrators to take note on ]'s behavior, and I encourage you to not be intimidated for this outrageous behavior and put the article back into his original state. Thanks. ] 19:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

:Hello! I have reverted the article back to your edition. Hopefully, ] will not create more troubles. I was never against creating a separate article, and in fact this has being proposed by more than 1 wikipedian. Please read the Talk Page and tell me your opinion of this dispute. ] 19:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

::As you can see, ] has not responded. I wonder why. I'm changing his "Legacy of the War of the Pacific" article for ] ] 14:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

:::Hello there! The creation of an article similar to the one dealing with Ecuador and Peru can be one of the many answers for you problems. However, remember that as of today neither side has declared parts of the ] or the ] null and void, or that there was a historical dispute between both countries for a certain territory. Chile got ] and ] in war, and Misplaced Pages cannot change that. Only minor groups of nationalist reject this, but that doesn't mean that we have an ongoing dispute with Chile. The Maritime Dispute is another separate subject in both political and international context, and I think is better to develop it into a full encyclopedic article that will eventually include Ecuador, one of the parties involved and another country that had (but solved) a similar problem with Peru. ] 16:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

::Now, I'm deeply concern with Bdean's attitude. As you can see he simply doesn't bother to discuss at all and keeps attacking my person instead of my editions. I'm afraid that any change would be reverted by him. I simply don't know how to deal with him. ] 16:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

:... and this is just random: ] created this article ] to avoid working in the one that I renamed ]. ] 16:14, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The tag ] was created to reflect the contemporary nature of the maritime dispute (the conflict continues to this day and did not end in 2006!). Please note that ] developed the page ] after erasing the page I had created called "Contemporary legacy of the War of the Pacific" (as the editing history clearly indicates). The page was created in an effort to address ]'s concerns regarding the epistemological legitimacy of including the current maritime dispute on an entry dedicated to a 19th century war. Nevertheless, I continue to stand steadfast in my belief (shared by the majority of the scholarly community) that the ] continues to shape international relations and domestic relations in the respective primary countries involved in the dispute (Bolivia, Chile, and Peru), despite historically naive and uninformed claims to the contrary. ] 13 February 2007

I appreciate your commentary on my talk page and look forward to your input in resolving the editorial dispute over the historical legacy of the ], a major ] armed conflict whose lasting scars have yet to be healed. Regards, ] 13 Febuary 2007

== David I ==

Any thoughts on what should be cut from the David article? It's tough ... the notes and bibliography take up over 30kbs, meaning that any cuts taking the whole thing below 80 would severely alter the article. And it's a hard thing to destroy one's own work. Also, d'you think there should be a background section? If and when you have time to respond - I know you must be sick of me and this article - respond on either my talk page or ]. Best regards, '''] ('']'')''' 19:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

== At it again ==

The Jewish/Messianic Jewish war continues, this time over whether the Messianic Jews can have a template. It's gone to ] ]. -- ]<sup>]</sup> 21:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

== VegaDark's Request for Adminship==
<div style="align: center; padding: 0.1em; border: solid 3px orange; background-color: black;">]'''<span style="color:orange;font-weight:bold;">{{PAGENAME}}</span>'''
----
<font color=Orange>
Thank you for supporting ]. It was successful at a unanimous 52/0/0. I hope I can live up to the kind words expressed of me there, and hope to now be more of an asset to the community with access to the tools. Please feel free to leave a message on ] if you have any suggestions for me in the future. Thanks again! ] 07:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
----
</font></div>

== RE: David ==

Thanks for you help. I'm gonna have to cut some of the text and divide many paragraphs, even though I really don't want to. Undoubtedly this will produce more typos and I'll have to do more work. Such is the FAC process. But the way it works is that FAC is the only way to be assured decent peer review and outsider perspective, and so is a necessary evil. BTW, I just sent you that material because I ''thought'' you were working on getting Flann Sinna to FA, but you should feel free to do whatever you want. Like I said, if you need anything from that source for any other figures, just ask. Oh, do you have designs on the St Patrick article? I'll send you the relevant article just in case. Best regards, '''] ('']'')''' 00:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

== ], once again.. ==
Hello there! I'm afraid that this user is once again attempting to create troubles, only that this time it involves the article of ]. To make a long story short:
:I finished organizing the Presidents of Peru and added a small footnote that neutrally stated: "President Fujimori submitted his resignation to Congress". Apparently, anti-Fujimoristas Wikipedians want to add that he "resigned by fax", clearly a "Red Herring" fallacy with the clear intention to denigrate this action. Nevertheless, a civilized discussion is going on in the talk page of the article, and all of a sudden ] is creating problems once again by attempting to force his POV in the article.
Do you think you can help us to sort this problem? your mediation in the ] was really helpful and I think that you can give us a hand once again. Thanks ] 03:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

::Thank you for your quick response in the article of ]. I do not agree with some of your statements, but hopefully your editions can help us to prevent another rv war. ] 18:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

:::Hello there! Thanks for your reply. ] has a clear Anti-Fujimori political agenda, and just by looking at his contributions you can confirm that indeed he is not looking for neutrality but to impose what he considers is "historical record". That's my biggest concern here: that Misplaced Pages becomes a heaven for people with bias and slander against certain countries or public figures. In this case, the fact that he faxed or submitted the resignation is not the problem - after all, He was impeached by Congress. But why is Bdean1963 so obsessed with the idea of introducing that detail? obviously, to divert the discussion to a more favorable environment for him, a clear "Red Herring" fallacy. 19:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

==CIA EU Warrants==
I believe that the EU warrants for arrest of 25 CIA agents is a stunning event. These warrants are lawful and may be applied in all EU states. This is a novel legal trend and I think it should be followed. I think that it should be archived. This is the beginning of a long process. I believe these names are probably aliases, but in any event this hasn't been reported in the mainstream press. I would like to leave the article on wiki for a month and improve it with other articles. If the arrest warrants are withdrawn then I would be happy to delete this article. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 19:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

== RFA? ==

I was reading ] and I noticed that you said that you weren't an admin which I was in shock. I always see you around doing good work and I wonder if you are willing to have an RFA. Thanks ] ] 02:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

== Starslip crisis ==

I added the permalink to that version of the wiki page, as up to that point all edits had been made by Straub himself. But granted, its a long shot, but I'm not sure another source to that fact exits. ] 22:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I dug around and found a better source (bottom section). ] 22:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

== Germanic culture ==

Ok, thank you, there was an earlier dispute as to why the article was titled German culture, but i renamed it to Germanic culture to 'widen' the description title, i must have been thinking of actual "]" culture. -- ] <small>(])</small> 15:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

== ] ==

I've made some changes. I will also check Michael Ashley's Mammoth Book of British Kings and Queens and see if there are any good tidbits in there. -B ] ] ] 03:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Rodel Itulrade
Fair enough, your points were all valid. I simply thought that Itulrade is likely to feature heavily on the 12th book of the series, and thus readers curious about what is known could look it up on[REDACTED] rather than having to go through the entire wheel of time series themselves.-]

== Question re (attempted) new stub ==

Hello Angus, I'm a bit of a "noobie" here so ... I attempted to add a stub regarding folk musician Andy Ramage who was influencial from late 60s through current times (Bitter Wythie, Harness, Glenfarg Folk Club). Your return comment indicated that I did not meet guidelines. I've contributed serveral things over the last couple of years without wading through guidelines and this is the first "push back" I received. I skimmed the guidelines in this case. Most are clear and reasonable but do not seem to be relevant to this case so any detailed feedback would be helpfull.

Thanks in advance. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 11:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

Hello Angus,

I hope I'm using this system correctly (note that my post in your discussion is marked as "unsigned" - take this as unfamiliarity rather than disrespect:-)

Thanks for the detailed response. Between my question and your response, I read through the music notability discussion and frankly it's a bit of a "bourach". The most obvious criticism is that the attempted guidelines seem to be well suited for mainstream recording and commercial work but not for less-commercial areas of musical activity.

My early understanding of Misplaced Pages was that it would not suffer the problems of conventional sources (e.g. exclusion of "less important" topics due to lack of space - as in a book) since it was digital and bits are cheap and available in vast quantity.

I have to think that if we applied this sort of thing to geography, only "important" and "notable" places would be recorded and written about. I would think that an on-lin resource would want to be as inclusive as possible in order to be something more than older-style references. Instead, we seem to be getting the same social engineering that occurs when something becomes sucessful - the creation of a priesthood who control the resource. In general terms, these development are similar to those seen in the commercial music scene - payola, play lists, pr/journo flacks etc.

Ah well - I'll leave the rant and go back to the drawing board on Ramage. I have a couple of reference books on Scottish music where I think he is mentioned. Perhaps I can also add a couple of recording references and his influence in developing club and festival activity in central Scotland.

Regards


] 11:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

== Manga Notability - Beauty is the Beast proposed deletion ==

Hi there! You added a 'proposed deletion' template to the ] article (stub). I removed it, my reasons are on the talk page. You did have a point with some of your arguments though, and I'd like you to know that I've taken the issue of ''Manga Notability'' to the ]. I'd like to get some consensus with the other project members on what a 'notable manga' is. According to the outcome, the ''Beauty is the Beast'' article could get put up for deletion again. ] 19:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

== Andy Ramage ==

Angus,

Thanks for the pointers - I'll review them later in the week. I was aware of the sandbox idea but NOT that you could make personal sandbox setup for long-term development of contributions. Cool feature.

] 19:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

==Re: misplaced comment at DRV==

Yes, you are correct. ] 01:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

==Re:UCFD==
That would be helpful. Even if you only participated in the discussions would be nice, as you can see we don't have very many regulars there and some end up being closed after only 3 people adding their input. ] 01:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
:The closings looked fine. Except non-admins can't do all the work that is required in a rename result, since the original category needs to be deleted once the new one is created and the members are transferred over. just tag it for speedy delete when you are done transferring members and that should be fine. ] 21:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

== column layout example ==

] ] 18:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

:Thanks for answering my question. :) Your explanation was very clear. Nevertheless, i must be missing something, because all i see is two single column lists. Can you please make sure you got it right? ] 21:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

::Spectacular! Thanks. :) ] 21:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

==]==

Just after finishing extensive revising of the above article. I aim to keep on at it over the coming weeks and submit it for peer review. Would very much appreciate your thoughts. ] 20:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

:All nitpicking much apprecieated. Do hope to get back to the Irish Bruce wars, as Jdorney was very dissapointed in me. Here's hoping! ] 20:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
==Thanks==
<div style="float:center;border-style:solid;border-color:#009999;background-color:#BACDDE;border-width:2px;text-align:left;font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;padding:8px; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 1em; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 1em; -moz-border-radius-topright: 1em; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 1em;" class="plainlinks">]
<span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS">It's been a week since ] passed, and since I haven't managed to delete the Main Page - yet - I figure it's safe to send these out. Thanks a lot for participating in my RfA; I hope to do a good job. If you see me doing something wrong, need help, or just want to have a chat, please don't hesitate to drop by :) &ndash; <span style="font-family:trebuchet ms">]_]</span> 07:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
</div>
Please feel free to call on me, should you ever find good use for me and :) &ndash; <span style="font-family:trebuchet ms">]_]</span> 07:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

==]==
You may be the one who asked for a citation regarding the "Man in the Iron Mask" portion of the Tyndall article. See ], where he is alleged (not by me) to have been one of the candidates. ] 13:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


==]==

No article on Mac Fhirbhisigh would be complete without one on Nollaig. We're not short on good historians here in Ireland, but for my money Nollaig is head and shoulders above many. Besides citing a few more of his works, and maybe adding a photo, this article is nearly complete. ] 23:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

== Ready for Deletion ==

Why do you think ] is not ready for deletion? <i>Happy Editing by <b>]<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub><sup>]</sup></b> on </i> 17:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

== Thanks! ==

Guess whose name just popped up on your talk page? Thanks for supporting ]. It was (47/0/0) upon closure and now ] is complete. I think the tools will aid both me and the encyclopedia. Feel free to on my talk page, or if you think I'm misbehaving I'm always open to ]. Thanks, <font face="comic sans ms" color="#454545">]</font><sup>]</font></sup> 13:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

== CfD no consensus? ==

Angus - you closed ] as "no consensus", even though the only two people who expressed any opinion at all (myself and Thewanderer) had come to something of an agreement - that Category:Repubbliche Marinare should be merged. (Thewanderer had not replied to my last suggestion, but I'd think it was a pretty uncontroversial WP:MOS issue.) Why then the "no consensus" close? Becuase there were only two people who ever expressed an opinion? Or because the last issue was left hanging? <span style="font-family:serif;font-size:120%">''']''' ]</span> 19:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

==Tapadh leat==
Thanks for your kind and constructive comments on my Editor Review. I will take your valuable advice to heart.--] <sup>]</sup> | <sup>]</sup> 23:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

== RE: Season Ticket ==
Hello, you removed a paragraph with a link to a web site where people who share tickets
can manage them. I though I had written about that site in an objective and informative
way. Aren't such references appropriate in[REDACTED] if they show no bias? I'm new here,
so just wondering...Thanks, ] 20:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

== Category:Founding Fathers of the United States ==

In closing the WP:CFD debate on ], you listed this as having "no consensus". Counting the votes, I saw that 2/3 of the people voted to delete. This is a good consensus by many people's standards. Could you explain why you closed this as "no consensus"? ] 11:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

:I generally do agree with your decisions on closing WP:CFD arguments (even if they contradict my vote), and I do respect your work on WP:CFD. This one category in particular simply seemed badly named and badly applied, and the majority in favor of deletion seemed particularly strong. I will ask for a second opinion on the category, or I will re-nominate it for deletion. ] 12:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

::This category has now been renominated for deletion. ] 00:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

== Category: Worldcon Guests of Honor ==

You closed the WP:CFD debate on ] with 'DELETE', yet when I look at the list of votes there were 6 to keep against 5 to delete. I can understand possibly having 'no consensus', but why choose Delete? ] 12:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Angus - thanks for your speedy response. Leaving aside the main issue about the category, I don't understand your comments about 'easter-egged cross-namespace link' and contextualisation. I will update the ] with the GoHs though. ] 13:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

:I read your comments to ] and while I understand them, I still think the decision to delete was premature (note, I did create the category). I was unaware of the debate until I saw the bots going through and deleting the references. There are other reasons to keep these, some of which ] articulated and would suggest, like he did, that "no consensus" would have been a better result at this time. ] 15:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

:The administrator has come to an incorrect conclusion on this issue. Five votes to "Delete" and six votes to "Keep" is '''not''' a consensus to Delete. This is either an unintentional error or an intentional error. ] 16:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
::(I orignally put this comment in the wrong section, sorry. I am contesting the decision to delete ], not the Allo, Allo thing.) ] 16:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

:I have no opinion on whether the category should be kept or not. However the ] archive states "the result of the debate was '''delete'''", and it is certainly not obvious from reading the debate how this could be seen as a fair summary. Perhaps your comments to ] might usefully have been added to the debate itself, with or without the accompanying decision. ] 16:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

XfD closes are only glossed in exceptionally. I don't believe this was sufficiently exceptional to require any glossing. The fact that XfD is not a vote surely requires no explanation at this time. I've explained my rationale. If it's not persuasive then according to ] ''any'' administrator can overturn it for you. You don't even need to bother with ]. ] ] 16:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

:Your comments on ]'s talk page (which I should not have to track down) have it backwards. No one in the discussion referred to "overcategorization", the opponents of the category mostly just seemed to think it wasn't a significant honor, which is not the case. I have supported deleting categories in many discussions and I have cleaned up categories on hundreds of author pages to reduce overcategorization, so I know what this problem looks like, and this category isn't the problem. We can dig around and find other administrators to try to fix it, but you made the mistake, you should take responsibility for fixing it. ] 17:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

::Saying that being a Guest of Honor is "not a significant honour" certainly is an argument from overcategorization. It may be significant to fandom, but that seems a rather poor form of argument. Everything is important to some group of people. I'll happily put things back the way they were if someone overturns the close. I really don't see what more I can do. ] ] 17:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

:::No, it isn't. You can't categorize arguments on one side with a dismissive template and then say arguments (from less-informed people) that are just ] are inherently more logical. Had the question of overcategorization been raised in the discussion, it could have been addressed. ] 17:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Since ]'s page claims to be your sockpuppet, I'm assuming you restored the authors to this category. You might want to go back and alphabetize the names, because right now almost all of them are sorted by first name. -] 21:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

== ] ==

I'm not really supposed to kill it until it's empty, I've moved it to ], from ]. There are scripts to empty it ... -- <i>] <sup>]</sup></i> 14:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

== Deletion Review ==
An editor has asked for a ] of ]. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ] 17:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


::::::] ] 22:38, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
:It looks at DRV like you consented to undo your CFD close because you aren't an admin. I'd do it as an admin, and close the DRV, but I haven't been at CFD enough to fix the tag. If you can undo the close there (feel free to opine with yuor close withdrawn), we can close the DRV. ] 18:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
::Hello Angus. Now I have seen the elegant resolution of this twisty point, I still don't understand your comment: "Still, procedurally speaking this DRV unnecessary, unless someone made me an admin without my knowledge or consent." If you are successfully impersonating an admin (which seems OK up to this point) then there still needs to be a DRV option on your action. No? ] 21:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


::::::: Brilliant! ] (<small>]</small>) 16:19, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
== My RfA ==
:::::::{{yo|Cactus.man}} Excellent. ] ]] 18:53, 6 December 2019 (UTC)


Thought I would advance the Quaich a bit so created a template, ], to make its issue a bit easier. It's ] code but modified the colours in line with ]. Any changes needed?--] | (]) 15:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in my recent RfA which passed unanimously - thus proving that you can indeed fool some of the people some of the time. I'm still coming to terms with the new functionality I have, but so far nothing bad has happened. As always, if there's anything you need to let me know, just drop me a line on my Talk page. ] - ] 10:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


Just saw this, after looking at ]. And I think the idea is a nice one. As the image isn't a "barnstar", I added the award to ]. I'll add a link to ]'s template as well. - <b>]</b> 04:00, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
== Restoring Worldcon Guests of Honor ==
==] nomination of ]==
]


A tag has been placed on ] indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a ], a ], a ], under discussion at ], or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under ].
Looks like you and I had the same idea about the same time. Good idea! --] 22:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may '''contest the nomination''' by ] and removing the speedy deletion tag. <!-- Template:Db-catempty-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 08:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
== RE: Indeedie ==
Indeedie. Just what I was thinking. proves I think that he is not a new user, though I do't believe there is enough info yet to identify him with you-know-who. We'll just have to see if he starts appearing on the harp page and his other favorite ex-hang-outs. '''] ('']'')''' 14:48, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


== Redirect listed at ] ==
: Hey, well hopefully - if 'tis him - he won't make it that hard. Anyways, check out . Scottish historians seem to have missed this. Look at the preceeding entry, and tell me if you think this has no impact on our understanding of this period. Regards, '''] ('']'')''' 15:19, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


]
==Book of Lismore==
A redirect or redirects you have created has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink| Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Redirects. with periods following "the" }}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:Rfd mass notice --> ] ]∫] 14:12, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Yes, and it's only a stub. No, I didnt use that source, I used another, but it's interesting that you point that out, for I too see a similarity. Well, the stub can be left. I am sure the information is accurate as I crossed checked it. Thanks. ] 15:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:12, 13 December 2024

This Wikipedian is deceased. Respectful comments of remembrance may be left below.
Archiving icon
Archives

Sad news

I just got word from his brother that Angus passed away early on Friday morning. He had been battling lymphoma for some time. I knew him both on and off Misplaced Pages, and am so sad that he is gone - Alison 12:35, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Sad indeed. Look above. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
link - Alison 13:52, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
How sad. RIP, Angus. --Bill Reid | (talk) 17:40, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
A terrible loss, you will be remembered and missed. Rest in Peace, friend. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:40, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Urf. And cancer robs us of another one... Ealdgyth - Talk 18:56, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
I'm sorry to hear this. I never knew Angus personally, but I've seen him around many times over the years. He will be missed. Kurtis 04:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Angus was kind and helpful and did a mountain a good work. We will remember him. Haukur (talk) 21:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Really sorry to learn of this. Angus was a bit of a mentor for me when I started editing Misplaced Pages. Finn Rindahl (talk) 18:33, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Funeral details here - Alison 03:06, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

I never knew Angus in real life, but I looked up to him as a Wikipedian. He was always kind and thoughtful. He contributed so much in content and discussion. I wish he were still here. Rest in peace Angus. --Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 02:23, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

In memoriam

  • "A candle"
  • "Flowers"
  • "The Japanese peace bell at the headquarters of the United Nations"
  • "An eternal flame"
We will remember your contributions and your service. Thank you. Requiescat in pace.
↠Pine (✉) 00:08, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Eight years!

We'll remember you and your work here! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Just thought I'd add here, didn't know Angus at all, virtually or otherwise as far as I know, no doubt I have benefitted unknowingly from many of his contributions. Anyway came here as a result of searching through the many Scottish political maps he created on Commons, something I often view and use but have no experience in creating - another area where his input is clearly missed. So just thought I'd weigh in to the recognition of his efforts. My wife had lymphoma, must have been around the same time, a wee sneaky invasive cancer (not that any type is nice). Thankfully she survived. As anyone been awarded the Quaich yet? Seems a shame to create it but not to award it. Crowsus (talk) 19:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

The Quaich

I can't think of what at the moment, but it would be nice and fitting if we could find some way of honoring / institutionalising his memory in some way, perhaps via one of the WikiProjects most associated with his work (Middle Ages, Scotland, etc). Some sort of Angusmclellan (Memorial) award or barnstar? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
An excellent idea. I never knew Angus personally, but what limited interaction I had with him on WP was always helpful and extremely positive. How about the "McLellan Quaich" for excellent contributions to Scottish coverage in Misplaced Pages? Just a thought. --Cactus.man ✍ 20:37, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
The 'McLellan Quaich' sounds great! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 12:52, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
A very sad loss indeed. Angus was knowledgeable, able, kindly and disinclined to get involved in drama - I echo Brianann's comments above and support the 'McLellan Quaich' idea. Ben MacDui 16:42, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

PS Here's a start:

The McLellan Quaich
Awarded to 'User:xx' for outstanding contributions to Scottish coverage in Misplaced Pages.
Deacon's idea is very fitting and Cactus.man's proposal for a McLellan Quaich coupled with Ben MacDui's design of such an award are ideal. --Bill Reid | (talk) 19:34, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks to @Ben MacDui: for knocking up a prototype award. Can I suggest using the following image instead: File: Quaich.jpg. I think it's an improvement because it's a cleaner representation of the quality of siversmith work and celtic imagery typically crafted into the handles.
The McLellan Quaich
Awarded to 'User:xx' for outstanding contributions to Scottish coverage in Misplaced Pages.
Cactus.man ✍ 22:38, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Brilliant! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 16:19, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
@Cactus.man: Excellent. Ben MacDui 18:53, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Thought I would advance the Quaich a bit so created a template, Template:The McLellan Quaich, to make its issue a bit easier. It's Cactus.man's code but modified the colours in line with Misplaced Pages: Talk page templates. Any changes needed?--Bill Reid | (talk) 15:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Just saw this, after looking at Misplaced Pages:Deceased Wikipedians. And I think the idea is a nice one. As the image isn't a "barnstar", I added the award to Misplaced Pages:Personal user awards/Topics. I'll add a link to User:Billreid's template as well. - jc37 04:00, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Unreferenced Kent-related articles

A tag has been placed on Category:Unreferenced Kent-related articles indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz 08:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Redirect listed at Redirects for discussion

A redirect or redirects you have created has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 13 § Redirects. with periods following "the" until a consensus is reached. mwwv ∫edits 14:12, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories:
User talk:Angusmclellan: Difference between revisions Add topic