User talk:Adam Bishop/archive9

Malik Ric

A few weeks ago, someone removed mention of Richard I of England becoming a "bogeyman" from that article because it "didn't have a citation", despite an inline mention of William of Tyre ([1]). If you have time, maybe you could re-insert with a quote from William or something? The original doesn't mention the Arabicization of his name. Choess (talk) 01:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look. (I tried Malik/Melic and Ric/Rik as well without finding anything useful in Google Books.) As long as I am loading you with suggestions, bailli could stand serious improvement. If I understand the term correctly, it's a bit like the English "lieutenant" in that it could describe anything from a castellan to a viceroy, but I have no idea how I'd prove or source that. Something else to think about in your no doubt copious free time. All the best, Choess (talk) 03:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Cleaning up after another mover, who moved Roman Catholic Archdiocese of St. Louis -> Archdiocese of St. Louis. Could you help me clean up after his mess by merging all 3 existing pages to Roman Catholic Archdiocese of St. Louis? Thanks.

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:MovePage/Archdiocese_of_Saint_Louis Benkenobi18 (talk) 08:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more. Can you please help me move List of Roman Catholic archbishops of Tours -> Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Tours? Benkenobi18 (talk) 08:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to burden you again. Need to move Archbishop of Reims -> Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Reims. Thanks so much. Benkenobi18 (talk) 09:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hi, I noticed you were an admin, and I was just wondering if you could put a short semi-protect on this users talk page User talk:NawlinWiki It is currently being vandalized by IP's every couple minutes. A block would be pointless, because somehow the IP changes ranges each time. Thanks, Landon1980 (talk) 05:38, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Holy See of Cilicia

Hi, Adam. Do you have an opinion about whether Holy See of Cilicia or Catholicossate of the Great House of Cilicia is the the better name? I am not myself sure what to think but felt that you might know. Thanks, Aramgar (talk) 02:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Latin Wikipedia

Hi Adam, could you change my account name on the Latin Wikipedia (Mateusz Lemôlálô → Teysz Kamieński). Greetings from the Netherlands, Mateusz of Lemoland (talk) 14:36, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I still want to change it. Teysz Kamieński (talk) 15:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam, today we had two not-so-nice usernames registered (the ones that contain the word “stretched”). Could you please rename these accounts, e. g. to “Renamed vandal 2” and “Renamed vandal 3”? Thanks in advance, --la:Usor:UV 13:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Adam, could you please grant bot status to la:Usor:BotSottile, la:Usor:Ginosbot, la:Usor:LaaknorBot, and la:Usor:SpBot? These bots seem to be doing good work. Thanks in advance! --la:Usor:UV 14:01, 17 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by UV (talk • contribs)

Thank you! --UV (talk) 21:33, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam, could you please change my account name on the Latin WP la:Usor:Vulpinus to la:Usor:Alopex. Thx. 80.143.1.53 (talk) 09:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam, you accidentally renamed this user to la:Usor:Alopex. (with a dot at the end of the username) instead of la:Usor:Alopex (without dot). Could you please rename this user again in order to remove the dot? Otherwise, this user will not be able to use his SUL account, because a SUL account is not possible when the usernames are different.

(There currently is an an old account la:Usor:Alopex but this account has no edits at all. It may therefore be necessary first to rename "Alopex" to "Alopex-old" or something similar and then "Alopex." to "Alopex".)

Thank you! --UV (talk) 21:33, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam, recently we again had a not-so-nice username registered (again containing the word “stretched”). Could you please rename this account as well, e. g. to “Renamedvandal3”? Thanks in advance, --la:Usor:UV 22:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Adam, today our username vandal struck again: [2]. Please rename this user, e. g. to “Renamedvandal4”. Thanks in advance, --la:Usor:UV 19:45, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Adam, could you please grant bot status to la:Usor:StigBot and la:Usor:Ptbotgourou? They seem to work ok, and they fill up our recentchanges list. Thanks in advance! --la:Usor:UV 21:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by UV (talk • contribs)

Saunders Secondary School

Can you please explain the reasons for reverting User:99.248.178.65 without an edit-summary on that article, not communicating with them, and blocking them, without warning, for a week? I'm tempted to unblock, as we have received a complaint on the unblock-en-l mailing list. Maxim_(talk) 23:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Vimy Ridge

Battle of Vimy Ridge is currently under peer review in an effort to get it to A or FA quality. The article has greatly improved over the pas few months but still needs work. I am sending out a notice to individuals who have contributed on the talk page to help with a copy-edit. Fresh eyes are always helpful. All the best. Labattblueboy (talk) 14:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

balkanian name issue

I think we should finally find a solution about the name issue in the balkanian towns. In every albanian town there is a greek name. I think we should live the names in the towns, cities and regions were there is a minority other then the main ethnic population and not in every town. For example, why should there be a name in Greek in Vlora page, where the entire population is albanian. It was found by Greeks, like New York was founded by Dutch. What`s the point? And secondly, it was founded by ancient greeks, why should we put modern greek in first paragraph? What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arditbido (talk • contribs) 13:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guy de Lusignan

Come on Adam, I was surprised by your edit. It's clearly Guy de Lusignan. Even the English statue in Damascus uses the "de". Only 900 v. 700 on google books admittedly, but it's more when it only includes the name as a surname. How will anyone know it's a hereditary name if you use "of"? Even English earls keep their "de" untranslated. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 12:16, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adam, sorry, I didn't mean to make you feel like you had to write out a whole list. Just searching google books (900-odd for de v. 700-odd for "of") or scholar fulfills the same purpose without a fraction of the effort. It's pretty much an aesthetic thing, not the kind of issue scholars would form consensi about. It seems to me mad that (de being virtually an English word) all the English (not to mention Irish and Scottish) settled French guys would keep their "de" untranslated, but Guy de Lusignan, Reinald de Châtillon, et al., get "of". Check his interwikis too, en.wiki is one of the few translating it. These names, call them surnames or not, are part of French aristocratic culture and the effect is lost if you make them look like, I dunno, Guy of Cyrpus or Augustine of Canterbury, not to mention made-up wiki ones like Radulf of Brechin. And of course, in wiki naming culture, there is a difference between Hugh of France (French king) and Hugh de France (prince of French royal house). Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 03:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problems could certainly be avoided by using de. ;) I don't think wiki has any written guideline/policy regarding sub-comital rulers, the sires and lords. Counts and Dukes are supposed to be "NAME, Count of X", but I don't think that'd work. The French ones are in anarchy anyways. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 05:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR broken by user

Please see the edit war that is started in Igoumenitsa page. User:Zakronian has violated WP:NCGN. Please do something. balkanian (talk) 14:18, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also in Margariti, Parga, Parapotamos, etc.balkanian (talk) 14:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please Help

Hi Adam, you don't know me but I found your name on the admin list. I've just created my user page. I uploaded a private photo of myself onto the page. It was flagged for speedy deletion because I'd not put the proper copyright tag on. I have found the right one and added it, but the caption in the photo still says that it's up for speedy deletion. I've removed the speedy delete box and everything. Can you check it out and get my old caption put back? The image is image:Declan_Davis.jpg. Cheers Declan Davis (talk) 22:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've fixed it. I just undid everything and it all went away. I haven't broken any Wikipedia laws but undoing it have I? I don't know if it was a real person that did it, or if it was an automatic process. Declan Davis (talk) 22:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greek Stuff

I don't have any problem against greeks, but since they are deforming the reality against albanians and Romans, I cannot just stay and watch.Emperordarius (talk) 08:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:20, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am Mario

Hi Adam. If you didn't notice User:PaxEquilibrium was very profilic sock puppet master. He was also an "owner of DAI" - this source was important to him for building POV in other related articles. An anon contributing (you asked in the talk page: are you Mario?) to DAI article could be User:I am Mario - sock of Pax. Pax did distinguish himself from this anon [3], in the same way as he did it elsewhere too, like here [4], as you can see he criticized his own sock edits. While his socks were wild and extreme POV pushers, Pax as master had image of an objective contributor. I've reported my suspect to admin User:Thatcher [5]. Just to inform you. Zenanarh (talk) 08:27, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Violations of ODB onomatology

Hi Adam. I saw your comments on the talk page of Alexios I Komnenos and I would like to request that you revert the arbitrary changes made by Deipnosophista to these pages without the courtesy of a discussion especially after the long and bitter history of this Byzantine onomatology saga. If arbitrary changes can be implemented by stealth this can seriously harm the ethical standards which should govern the wiki. You were a frequent and welcome participant in the old discussions. You know intimately the whole controversy and the potential it has to reopen unproductive and protracted disputes. Please do not allow this unjustified reversal to stand. Thank you. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 04:42, 13 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Thank you Adam for your message. I really appreciate it. There are some other supplementary articles left such as Alexius V Ducas, Alexius II Comnenus, Heraclius etc. but since I already told Yannis to do them I'll wait for him to take them up. By tomorrow I expect a resolution to this. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 01:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting my moves

You reverted two of my moves today: Joscius and Frederick (Archbishop of Tyre). I had moved these pages in accordance with the general naming conventions and with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Clergy). In general, put pages at the simplest title (for people, their name: this is what I did with Joscius). If a name is not sufficient (as obviously is the case with Frederick), the guideline explicitly states "use the form Thomas de Rossy (Bishop of the Isles) rather than Thomas de Rossy, Bishop of the Isles". Any reason why you reverted me, thereby going from a name in line with the guideline back towards a name contrary to the guideline? Fram (talk) 12:23, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Crusade

Hi, Adam. I was approached by MILHIST to work on First Crusade, which is listed for 0.7 inclusion, but lacks the inline cites generally required of FAs these days. My knowledge of the Middle Ages is not as profound as Wandastouring generously claims, and the Crusades are not my area (and I have none of the referenced books). However, I know from the ref desk that they are yours; moreover, I find from the article history that you were the original FA nominator, so you're likely to have an interest, as well as access to sources. The deadline is 20 October, so any help appreciated! Thanks, Gwinva (talk) 01:46, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Gwinva (talk) 09:10, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Caps

I have left this message [6] on Jossi's talk page. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 12:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for help

I kindly ask your assistance for the renaming of "dodo" account to something else (anything) on latin wikipedia. This in order to process the request on meta. All your help is appreciated. Thank you. -- m:drini 19:53, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

test

test to see if wikipedia.tv (thats the website im using) is a functional site blah blah blah if it isnt mahybe you wont get this message —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.127.114 (talk) 03:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish Roman Catholic saints

How can I remove the category Turkish Roman Catholic saints renaming this category to Anatolian Roman Catholic saints?

In general I would like to know how is possible to change category or subcategories.

Thanks a lot and sorry my mistakes related to categories but it will be construtive because there are saint belonging to Catholic Church and others belonging to Eastern ones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roltz (talk • contribs)

Latin

You may be busy, I know, but I just created Berthoald, Duke of Saxony and left a bunch of untranslated Latin in it. Since I have gone to you at least twice that I can recall for Latin help, I was hoping you could translate these fair-sized chunks if/when you have the time and/or the will. If not, then so be it, but I thought I'd let you know; they are too much for me to even take a stab at. Srnec (talk) 01:59, 12 October 2008 (UTC) I am not aware that Regino's Chronicon has been translated into English. But maybe you know otherwise. Srnec (talk) 02:02, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merci beaucoup and ¡Muchísimas gracias! (That's the closest to Latin I can get.) Srnec (talk) 05:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thirteenth-century Kingdom of Jerusalem, eh? I think I might have good sources for that period, so I'll see what I can do. Srnec (talk) 04:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

source for "li plus apareissanz et plus dreis heis dou rouame" from Guy de Lusignan

Hello Adam Bishop. Could you help me please? I'd like find the source of this quotation "li plus apareissanz et plus dreis heis dou rouame" of Renaud de Châtillon. I couldn't find any reliable external links. I'm trying to bring up the article Renaud de Châtillon into FA on my home wiki and this Renaud's quote is very interenting for me, but without ref I can't use it:(. With kind regards Emír Balduin Hallef Omar Ali al-Adid bin Abú Sharee al-Kerak (talk) 08:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Adam for the info:). But here, in central Europea, where I live, I have no chance to get this book, Medieval Women from Hamilton. I tried use the google books, but no luck.:( Could you tell me the page, if you know this book? Emír Balduin Hallef Omar Ali al-Adid bin Abú Sharee al-Kerak (talk) 08:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very very much Adam:)! I see that you intend the article Kingdom of Jerusalem to bring up to the FA, so I wish you good luck;). Cheers --Emír Balduin Hallef Omar Ali al-Adid bin Abú Sharee al-Kerak (talk) 15:24, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feudalism

Please explain why you reverted the edit I made without any explanation and using the rollback tool. I think I provided a decent explanation. Green caterpillar (talk) 10:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Explain please? Green caterpillar (talk) 20:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Battle of Syllaeum

An article that you have been involved in editing, Battle of Syllaeum, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Syllaeum. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Constantine ✍ 23:42, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Titular dioceses

There is no rhyme or reason to how the titular dioceses are named. I wouldn't suggest naming them after the officeholder, although the two are closely related, they are not the same thing. One is a person and the other is an ecclesiastical territory. I've deliberately avoided editing these articles other then to simply deposit them in a different bin from the current existing dioceses. If you wish to take on the project of giving them a proper nomenclature, I would wholeheartedly support your decisions. Benkenobi18 (talk) 06:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for a very prompt Arabic script to Jacob's Ford, it is very much appreciated.....Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 22:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caesarea Philippi was in use for only a short time...The info for Caesarea (basically Herod to Byzantium) can be expanded, with the majority in Banias. I'm looking to expand Banias substantially and trim Caesarea...Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 11:29, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Small abacus

Hello Adam, you are welcome to visit our page. Thank you.Roberto Lyra (talk) 20:08, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moog Guitar

Sorry - Could I ask why this article was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezshay (talk • contribs) 18:34, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Message

First Crusade has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. OpenSeven (talk) 16:57, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Message from OpenSeven

Adam Bishop, on the First Crusade FAR page, you said "I assure you all I did not make anything up". Please do not think that I was trying to suggest that you made anything up on the article. As an admin, I am sure you are aware that any debatable notions within an article (such as what motivated Europeans fighting during the First Crusade) should be cited, and the fact that you were approached by someone else and told that the article lacks "the inline cites generally required of FAs these days" (Source: Gwinva) does suggest my assertion that the article fails 1c of the FA criteria is warranted. My apologies if the preceeding sentence sounded in anyway patronising. As I did on the First Crusade FAR page, I apologise if I added citation tags to a paragraph that was already completely sourced. On a final note, I do not like being identified with the sentence "FAC busybodies stick tags everywhere when they have no knowledge of the subject", as I am sure you would not like it were you in my position. I do have some knowledge on the First Crusade from my own study of The Crusades in general, and your assertion that I stick tags everywhere without knowledge of the subject arguably infers that I am acting for the sake of ensuring the article fails the FAR. I am not saying that that was definetly your inference, and I apologise if it isn't, but can you see how that inference can come across? I do want this article to pass the FAR, and I am offended by the idea that I don't. Thank you for reading. OpenSeven (talk) 19:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the apology, and I agree that Wikipedia processes can be annoying sometimes. I too want the article to be the best source of information, and I hope it will retain FA status. OpenSeven (talk) 21:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vicipaedia

Greetings from la:wiki. We have elected a new magistratus, Adam: la:Usor:Xaverius. Could you please give him sysop status? Thanks -- Andrew Dalby 14:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings again! Could you please give la:Usor:Muro Bot bot status, as requested in our la:Vicipaedia:Taberna? Thank you! --la:Usor:UV 01:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by UV (talk • contribs)

Thanks!

		The Reference Desk Barnstar
		Thank you for contributing to my "greatest" poll on the Reference Desk! --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 05:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Thank You

Thank You for your help with "orgiastic decadence"! Elchananheller (talk) 05:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, that is awesome out of context. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:39, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Melisende of Arsuf

Thank you for your compliment. About the sources. Cawley uses a primary source, it's the Lignages d'Outremer Marciana MS Francese 20 CCLXXXIX, p.63. He uses this as a primary source for all his info on Melisende and the Ibelins. I have listed it but I suggest that we set up an external link to the Medieval Lands page which has citations to the Lignages d'Outremer source at the bottom. I have no luck with external links, cannot get them to work. Do you know how to do it? I think it would be helpful to the reader if he/she could just link to the page. Thank you again. If you notice any errors in the article, please correct them. I see that you are an authority on the Crusades and their kingdoms. A fascinating but alas brief, period of glorious medieval history that needs to be amplified.--jeanne (talk) 07:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MY illiterate friend Adam !

King saint Ladislaus I of Hungary was nominated as leader of I. Crusade, by the european monarchs. Ladislaus refused it. Why did you delete my post? Because medieval Hungary was more important country than your poor little medieval England? Learn history before you write! http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Hungary —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stears81 (talk • contribs)

Saint Ladislaus died before the arrival of papal herald. Read the Vatican's official Hungarian page: http://www.katolikus.hu/hun-saints/ladislaus.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stears81 (talk • contribs)

Image:Krak2.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Krak2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:50, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Basic things about Medieval age

Adam:

They came from France and Italy. The king of France was not allowed to participate because he was excommunicated. There were a few English crusaders but the king of England was not involved. In 1095 there was no king of Spain, and the Spanish were also not allowed to participate because they already had their own wars against the Muslims. The crusaders did pass through Hungary, but it was Kolman, not Ladislaus, who dealt with them. Perhaps that website is confusing the Fourth Crusade, when the king of Hungary was asked to join, or the Fifth Crusade, when (as you obviously know) Andrew played a major role. But Ladislaus was never a leader of the First Crusade and that website is mistaken. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stears:

Spanish kingdoms existed, the spanish countries united in the 17. century. Pope wasn't so greatpower as you tried to suggest. Popes originally were vassals of the Emperors, So popes tried to create a counterfeit text from ancient Rome. But Emperors didn't belive it. Sometimes popes were bundled out by Emperors. Holy Roman Emperors (who were the leaders of all catholic country) and Byzantine emperors (who were the leaders of all orthodox countries)were the main powers of the continent in X XI XII century. Read about early HRE. at www.britannica.com . Without the permission of Monarchs, the crusades have never happend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stears81 (talk • contribs) 17:35, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Denialist Hate Speech

First and foremost I would like to sincerely ask you for your help. Your input and patience is appreciated. I want to bring to your attention this. HD86 has made numerous comments such as "The Assyrians are EXTINCT people of ancient Mesopotamia whose name was stolen by some modern politicians and used in reference to the modern Syriacs. To label the modern Syriacs by "Assyrians" and to claim that "The Assyrian people trace their origins to the population of the pre-Islamic Levant" is indeed stupidity in its purest form." These comments are inflammatory, racist, unhistprical and outrageous. This user continues to deny that a whole race even exists. He needs to be wiki disciplined. This is unacceptable inflammtory denialist behavior. The equivalent of his statments would be that jews or arabs do not exist. Do you not see the point. His languge is very hateful and dimeaning to those of us involved in the project. If you take a look at his history he has similar incompetent statemetns regarding other controverisal topics. I ask for assistance in order to remove this hateful user from this discussion. He has denied the existence of an entire race that through ample ancient and modern evidence has existed for thousands of years. I will be waiting for your response. Ninevite (talk) 02:34, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Emphatics in Arabic loanwords from Greco-Latin

Not sure that there's any consistent rule for this, but there's certainly a ق and ط in دمقراطية ... Probably many of the words were borrowed through Aramaic, and in Aramaic undoubled non-emphatic stops preceded by a vowel automatically became fricatives ("spirantization"), so that ק and ט were useful for indicating non-fricativized stops (as is also the case in modern Hebrew). This doesn't explain the ص in صراط , though... AnonMoos (talk) 19:14, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi! Please note that I have filed a request for appeal here. Best regards PHG (talk) 16:05, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the clued-in

Oh, it doesn't surprise me, Adam, but I do hope I'm not alone in feeling discouraged. From where I sit, a current crisis in funding for educational projects renders such concern all the more acute. Please engage a Westerner's tolerance when you read my remarks, colored as they are by the light in which I and my neighbors view the world. -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:28, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Imad ad-Din

at least he was arabic poet and he speak arabic more than i do Bayrak (talk) 18:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PHG

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PHG/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PHG/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 23:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bandai Atmark article as redirect

Can I make Bandai Atmark as a redirect to Apple Pippin? Junkcops (talk) 23:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding User:Bayrak

Hello, Adam Bishop. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 67.194.202.113 (talk) 21:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam, I'm taking a look at this one, and would appreciate your thoughts at Talk:Khwārizmī. Painting with a broad brush, the dispute seems to boil down to whether he should be described as "Persian", "Iranian", or "of Persian stock". Do you have an opinion on the matter, based on the sources that are available to you? --El on ka 06:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Butting in: Persian. "Iranian" just means "Persian", except English speakers didn't use it until recently, so it usually connotes the Islamic Republic of Iran, which definitely has nothing much to do with al-Khwarizmi. Persian looks like a simpler way of saying "of Persian stock"; I'm really not sure of the difference. Srnec (talk) 02:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need Arabic sources and contact names

I'm not sure if you have seen this question at the reference desk, but I am writing a paper with a focus on the trade of cotton by Muslim and Jewish merchants. Do you know of any scholarly books on Muslim history that mentions the history of cotton production and trade in the Middle East? Also, do you know of some Arabists who I could contact that might have more info on the subject? Thanks. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 01:59, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like it would have some good info. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 03:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Background at First Crusade

I only added that stuff about the Reconquista to replace some fact-tagged stuff that wasn't even accurate. I agree, though, that all that (well-sourced) background information would be better off at the Crusades article, with only a quick overview at First Crusade. In general, I think both articles need serious re-structuring to entice anyone to read them. A lot of background information that is not necessarily pertinent to the events of the First Crusade does not help. Crusades should probably be about crusading, not just a series of summaries of the enumerated (and named) Crusades. Srnec (talk) 02:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to look at the structure of First Crusade and post a suggestion at the discussion page for how it might be better organised. Relatedly, the images might be better positioned and better chosen and perhaps the infobox whittled down a bit, but those are just suggestions. (I don't like the main image.) I think the historiography is very important to a topic like this (historical, controversial, and usually misunderstood), but it's hard to say where it belongs. Same goes for background. The primary historiography could probably go in a section at the First Crusade article, with the historiography of the Crusades in general (their causes, their effects) belongs at the general article only (or articles of their own, like Erdmann thesis or Historiography of the Crusades). I do think that the First Crusade article should be primarily a narrative, for the sake of the reader, but Crusades should not be narrative at all (how do you do justice to a narrative like that in one article?). This reminds me of the issues of Crusade literature and art that I raised at the taskforce talkpage when it was new. Its all part of the basic organisational issues that plague Wikipedia in general.

(As an aside, I find that Napoleone Orsini (disambiguation), which appears on my watchlist, has been deleted. You're an admin, and admins can see deleted pages, no? I was hoping you could tell me what was on the page that was deleted. I think it may have been just a dab page of redlinks, but I'd like to know, since they're probably redlinks I was intending to create in the mythical future.) Srnec (talk) 05:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why have you deleted my contribution? I've added also a reference [7] --Born Again 83 (talk) 16:01, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RomanCursive.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:RomanCursive.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi Adam. Thank you for your idea earlier on the Talk Page. I truely appreciate! PHG (talk) 16:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Protector of the Holy Sepulchre?

You removed the wikilink to Protector of the Holy Sepulchre from Church of the Holy Sepulchre. I think there might be something relevant here. There are several claimants to the title on King of Jerusalem, including the Brienne claim to the Kingdom of Jerusalem. On the other hand, the Crimean War was started from a disagreement over who has the right to be "protector of the Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire" and over the keys to Church of the Nativity. Does the the use of the term "Protector" here somehow refer to the title of "Protector of the Holy Sepulchre"? Did the European rulers somehow see the title of Protector analogous to the nominal title of King of Jerusalem? -- Petri Krohn (talk) 17:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In fact Napoleon III had a titular claim to King of Jerusalem. I still do not know how the Russian tsar Nicholas I came to be Protector. I have taken the issue to Talk:Crimean War#King of Jerusalem?. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 18:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Insular stuff

Why did you revert all of those recent additions without comment? -- Evertype·✆ 00:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bot flag for Luckas-bot

I saw that you're a bureaucrat on lawikipedia. Can you give bot flag to my bot? Thanks. --Luckas Blade (talk) 15:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Knights Hospitaller

Since it is now 31 Jan, please "unfreeze" Knights Hospitaller and I will attempt to mediate. Thanks. Kennel Kough (talk) 14:40, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your action. Have a happy and prosperous New Year. Sincerely, Kennel Kough (talk) 15:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bots on the Latin vicipaedia

Hello Adam, sorry for not notifying you yesterday already. Please see the proposal at la:Vicipaedia:Taberna#Global bots - allow them automatically?. Greetings, --la:Usor:UV 18:33, 2 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by UV (talk • contribs)

Hello Adam, global bots are now active in la.wikipedia. I would now suggest to remove the local bot flag from all bots that are global bots as well – that way, if a global bot ever loses its global bot flag for whatever reason (including, possibly, loss of trustworthiness – see below for an example), we would immediately notice by finding this bot's further edits visibly on recentchanges, watchlists etc. This affects the following bot accounts (that currently have both the global and the local bot flag):

Furthermore, I propose to remove the bot flag of la:Usor:WikiDreamer Bot (bot status was revoked on fr.wiki and it.wiki because the bot ran on very buggy software, the bot lost its global bot status, furthermore the bot's operator is inactive since August).

After this is done, I plan to examine the remaining bots – I suppose there are some long-inactive bots among them, possibly it would be a good idea to remove their bot status as well, to be on the safe side.

Thank you in advance! --la:Usor:UV 23:31, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello Adam, I have now examined the remaining bots and found that several have been inactive for a very long time. I propose to remove the bot flag from the following bots (in order to avoid unnoticed vandalism in case their account ever gets compromised):

Thank you in advance! --UV (talk) 22:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And another bot that just received the global bot flag, could you please remove the local one?

la:Usor:BodhisattvaBot

Thank you! --UV (talk) 21:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Adam, two more things:

I noticed that you did not yet look into my request of Jan. 23 (above). Any doubts as to the merits? Or as to procedure – would you prefer that I discuss this proposal on la:Vicipaedia:Taberna first?
Please see la:Vicipaedia:Taberna#De LucienBOT - we need a new bot flag ;-)

Thank you in advance! --UV (talk) 00:43, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Adam, another bot just received the global bot flag, could you please again remove the local bot flag?

la:Usor:TXiKiBoT

Thank you! --UV (talk) 23:04, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi Adam. As far as I know, Alain Demurger really is one of the authorities on the Templars, a leading French historian on the subject, and probably the leading authority on Jacques de Molay about whom he wrote a recent biography. Do you have a different opinion? Cheers PHG (talk) 21:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Malik Ric

Thanks for the tip. That's definitely the story that's usually linked with the phrase, but we have yet to see "Malik Ric" in a primary source. Fascinating. (Incidentally, while pushing it through Google Books, I find a snippet from Alison Weir translating the phrase as "evil Richard". The prosecution rests, m'lud.) Choess (talk) 22:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article Issue

Hello, I noticed an article that I find to be very suspicious, especially due to the extent it appears to have been vandalised. See here. The content is very questionable. If the article itself isn't fake, then it has definitely been severely vandalised. Unfortunately I have no knowledge on the topic. I know of the previous films, but this one is new to me. If you could have a look it'd be great.

Cheers, SevenCycles (talk) 01:00, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More insular spam

I guess you may have a point: Special:Contributions/217.124.16.89 -- Evertype·✆ 20:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

French grammar

Hi Adam. I wasn't sure that you saw the long (rambling?) answer I gave to your question at my talkpage. Have you enough information now?–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 21:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry for lurking, but I'd like to recommend "French Grammar and Usage" by Hawkins and Towell. It's the best grammar of French in English that I've seen. Try Googling "Hawkins Towell djvu" and you'll find pdf's and djvu's of it. I agree with Noetica about Grevisse.Joeldl (talk) 13:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are so many good options, aren't there Joeldl? I'll have a look at H&T myself, on the strength of your recommendation. For languages like Occitan or Catalan the choices are more limited, but it's amazing what treasures you can find in the corner bookshops of Montpellier or Barcelona. Amazon doesn't always deliver the goods; I still pine for a Neapolitan dictionary. Someday I'll get to Naples.

–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 18:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested it because it was the best I'd seen, but there are many I haven't, including the ones you mentioned. I like Hawkins and Towell because it's honest about the language rather than ignoring usages prescriptivists disagree with. No grammar I've seen has an appropriate balance between European and Canadian usage, though. Joeldl (talk) 04:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ermengarde of Maine

Hi Widsith, we already had an article under Ermengarde of Maine so I merged the Erembourg info there. I suspect, as with many women from that era, her name was recorded in various ways and whatever she called herself might be unknown. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:23, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dammit, I tried a few options to see if she was already here, but didn't think of "Ermengarde". Thanks for the nice merge job. Widsith (talk) 07:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request of username change in la.wiki

Could you please change my username in the Latin Wikipedia from PAD to Petrus Adamus? I would like to have the same name in all the Wikiprojects. Thank you beforehand. --Petrus Adamus (talk) 20:09, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Petrus Adamus exists there now, but it is only an automatically created account, within the SUL, so you have to usurp it formally. --Petrus Adamus (talk) 10:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, you are an administrator. (I am not, thus I have never done or seen the procedure.) Try to ask somebody. Thank you beforehand. --Petrus Adamus (talk) 21:25, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is how to solve the problem:

Beforehand, we make sure that we have proof that la:Usor:PAD and en:User:Petrus Adamus are the same person and that en:User:Petrus Adamus (= the username that we rename to) has the global account “Petrus Adamus”:
- We can judge from [8] and [9] that la:Usor:PAD and en:User:Petrus Adamus are the same person, because identical requests were made using both accounts.
- We can see from [10] that the account en:User:Petrus Adamus is attached to the global account “Petrus Adamus” (it “exists locally”).
Therefore, it is possible first to rename the account la:Usor:Petrus Adamus out of our way, to la:Usor:Petrus Adamus-SUL, and thereafter to rename la:Usor:PAD to la:Usor:Petrus Adamus. Greetings, --UV (talk) 23:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah...I remember doing that before. Thanks. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:27, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PHG

The above-linked Arbitration case has been closed and the final decision published.

PHG's mentorship and sourcing arrangement is both revised and extended; the full list of new conditions are available by clicking this link. Furthermore, the original topic ban on editing articles related to medieval or ancient history has been rescinded. PHG is prohibited from editing articles relating to the Mongol Empire, the Crusades, intersections between Crusader states and the Mongol Empire, and Hellenistic India—all broadly defined. This topic ban will last for a period of one year. He is permitted to make suggestions on talk pages, provided that he interacts with other editors in a civil fashion.

Any particular article may be added or removed from PHG's editing restriction at the discretion of his mentor; publicly logged to prevent confusion of the restriction's coverage. The mentor is encouraged to be responsive to feedback from editors in making and reconsidering such actions. Furthermore, the Committee noted that PHG has complied with the Committee's restrictions over the past ten months, and that PHG is encouraged to continue contributing to Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects. PHG should be permitted and encouraged by other editors to write well-sourced suggestions on talkpages, to contribute free-content images to Wikimedia Commons, and to build trust with the community.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Daniel (talk) 22:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)

The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted 'question'

I have deleted a 'question' you participated in at the RD as it looks more like an attempt at soapboxing by the OP (who has a history in this regard) then a genuine question. See here for the discussion Wikipedia talk:Reference desk#Removed 'question'. While your response was fine, I don't think anything that useful can come from the 'question' Nil Einne (talk) 10:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gladiator

Hello! I'm undertaking a copyedit of the article, which is proving a bit of a task. You seem to have had substantial interest and contribution in the past. The Article meanwhile has been drowning in its own details, and lack of citation remains a major problem. Any help/debate/dialogue would be good, assuming you've the time/opportunity/inclination. Haploidavey (talk) 01:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reading R. Röhricht

Dear A.B., what a delightful, helpful response you provided to my "2 titles" query on the Language Ref Desk! Now, don't you agree it's time for Herr Professor (?) Röhricht to have his own entry? Much as I'm even more-than-usually swamped with work at present, I believe that Wikipedia editing thrives on the principle of "one good turn deserves another" and what better in a case like this where pertinent information is already surfacing. What do you say? -- Deborahjay (talk) 07:46, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
...and further: I've had it on my mind all week to write to you with thanks and praise for the work you did in creating the page...and have simply been at a loss for words! I can't recall another instance, in my nearly three years of intermittently pestering people on various Reference Desks for help in my esoteric searches, that such a swift and extensive outcome as a page creation has ensued. I hope it brings you as much gratification as it has me. Thus far I've made my modest contribution with a handful of redirect pages, and I'd like to send a heads'-up to the German Wikipedia in hopes they'll find the subject notable for translation and inclusion. Are there German speaking editors in the Middle Ages WikiProject here? Perhaps they'd be the best touch... anyway, watch for follow-ups! -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Talk:Bint

A tag has been placed on Talk:Bint, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Talk:Bint|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Miami33139 (talk) 22:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

A Nobody^{My talk} has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Trojan Women - Additional Resources

Adam - we appear to have a difference of opinion on the page for Trojan Women by Euripides. I'd like to include links to relevant interpretations of the play. This is important since plays are dynamic works which exist in production, rather than as static words on a page.

BTW - I'm a theatre professional in the Philadelphia area and do a lot of work with both academic and professional theatre. One of the aspects I enjoy most is that plays are constantly being re-evaluated and applied to current circumstances. --Chris Plough (talk) 16:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure on the Monmouth College production version, the link was there previously. As for WCU, it's being directed by Harvey Rovine (renowned in this area) and is notable for:

Concept:

Production cut from 3 versions of the script and contemporized to make relevant with today's audiences.
Focusing on the women's struggle and how their loss of identity reflects the conflict between prevalent cultures.
The same anti-war themes obviously apply as must today as when Euripides wrote/performed the play originally.

Design:

Fully integrated live performance with multimedia/video designs (not video-in-a-box).
The creation of pre-play videos to develop the history of the 10-year war between the Achaeans and Trojans.

I've been involved with the concept, design and production of the show (so you know my bias). The show goes up on March 26th -- we can wait till after the run to post the link, if that makes a difference.

Unfortunately, the primary pages for it are on Facebook (videos, photos, design concepts), as the university doesn't have web hosting space for the theatre department. Most of the info is being replicated to MySpace and I chose that since it was more publicly available.--Chris Plough (talk) 19:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename request on the Latin Wikipedia

Hi, could you please look at la:Disputatio_Usoris:Adam_Episcopus#Rename_request_.28SUL.29. Thanks. Regards, Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 19:36, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same way it happens to other users I guess. Someone else happened to created an account with my username there. But anyway, can you go ahead and usurp the username or should we wait a certain number of days? (I highly doubt he will return since he hasn't edited since 2006) Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 16:01, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, my account will be automatically created once you rename the existing user. I haven't edited la.wikipedia in the past, no. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 22:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I need it renamed to complete my SUL unification. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 00:00, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it prevents my login unification from becoming complete. I highly doubt someone who hasn't edited since 2006 will be coming back. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 20:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because I would like to have it complete. If I leave a message on his talk page and he doesn't respond for a week then can the rename go forward? Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 15:38, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why? What about waiting 2 weeks as is the policy on vec.wikipedia? Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 15:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know that, but this will be the only unattached account soon after the usurption on vec.wikipedia. Most wikipedias have some sort of policy that deals with usurptions and whether or not you edit that wikipedia has nothing to do with it. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 16:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So first you say you will do it and then you say you won't just because I don't plan on editing there. Like I said, whether or not you plan on editing there has nothing to do with usurption on wikipedias with a policy on it. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 19:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Knights Hospitaller

Thanks, we were seconds from editing conflict :-). --Yopie 23:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, that Accon/Accaron/Ekron/Ptolemaida...!

Seems I was right to have sought clarification, and greatly appreciate your explanations—and, of course, the attribution (as "added value"). Now I'll have to scrutinize my rewrite to see if further tweaking will aid future readers so they won't come rushing back here in droves. I'm likely to be back, though, as I'm barely past the letter "A" in this glossary of Acre's history. You have been warned ;-) --Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 11:24, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator Elections

Nominations for Coordinator positions in the Military History WikiProject have commenced, and voting will begin on March 14, 2009. Make sure to get involved and ask questions to the candidates. Nominations for Coordinators goes until March 13. Then come out for the voting which begins on March 14. Thanks and Have a Great Day! Lord R. T. Oliver ^{The Olive Branch} 23:59, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saladin collaboration

Hi Adam! You've always been a caretaker and contributor to the Saladin article. I want to make it a Good article soon, so whenever you're not busy with other wiki or real-life stuff, please continue chip in as often as you can. I've asked Attilos to help as well. Cheers! --Al Ameer son (talk) 02:27, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the article is a mess. It shouldn't be hard to rewrite and expand the sections on his biography, but I don't know what to do with the Legacy section. I'm going to wait till we finish up with the bio before I get to that section though. I have the Reston book too, but the Lyons book is much more detailed. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick thanks

I forgot to check back to the entertainment reference desk and didn't have a chance to thank you and the others for contributing and helping me with this. So, here you go, my thanks! Good to know there's some other guitar players on here who I can always run to for help ;)

—Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

—Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 14:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

la.wiki

I ask you to please re-consider your position on the rename. The users' account has already been usurped on the Italian and Venetian Wikipedias, so he would have to use a different username on those if he ever returned, and now the account on la.wikipedia is the only left that is preventing me from completing login unification. Regards, Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 20:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

210 accounts across different projects have been attached to my global account and the one on la.wiki is the only unattached one. Even if this user returns he will be confined to one project because all the other Maximillion Pegasus accounts belong to me, so I urge you to rename the one on la.wiki. Regards, Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 21:39, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Humanism

Hi, could you take a look at this one? There are two editors, who hardly edit anything else, who have been edit-warring with various people over this article for months on various issues, most recently over the section on Renaissance Humanism, which they want to present as a direct forerunner of modern secular humanism. The last edit was this, and this section of the talk page is relevant. They have also been enthusiastically edit-warring with others over the lead section - really there is a question whether this article should just be a disam page leading to the articles on the different types of humanism, themselves greatly overlapping. Thanks, Johnbod (talk) 22:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bank for international ideas

I noticed you were an admin, can you put a short semi-protect on the Bank for International ideas, Iam just using wikipedia and i have provieded copy right -

--Bankleonard (talk) 14:43, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bank for Internationl Ideas

I would like to know why you have deleted my article - this ia a New system for economic development to help the people of the world - i have contacted the Wikipedia Information Team to shine more light on this dispute - their are many other articles on wikipedia that in my opinion are adverstiment and are not encyclopedia worthy.

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/American_Idol

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Twitter

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Who_Wants_to_Be_a_Millionaire%3F

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/MySpace

their is also a press release on the subject http://www.prlog.org/10207508-the-bank-for-international-ideas-will-facilitate-economic-development-created-by-leonard-johnson.html

--Bankleonard (talk) 03:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly block?

Hi there! I was wondering if you could possibly block 194.80.240.66. He/she/it has been incivil, used personal attacks, and refuses to sign his/her/its comments (and even yelled at the SineBot for signing his/her/its comments for him/her/it). If not, I understand, but if you could, that would be great. Thanks! 68.149.121.27 (talk) 02:46, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: Gladiator

Hello Adam. I notice you keep an occasional eye on Gladiator. The article's very long - perhaps too long (about 57 kb of readable prose) - and its footnotes are almost as long again. I'd like to promote it to at least some kind of category, but it still has some problems and would benefit from judicious cutting. After a couple of solid months' work on it, I'm least qualified to do that. Should I just wait for this to happen out of the blue? Or is there a central desk of some kind where I can ask? Regards! Haploidavey (talk) 18:42, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the helpful message. I've done as you suggest. Regards! Haploidavey (talk) 19:43, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

William of Tyre

Hi, I see you've been the most recent significant contributor to this article so thought you would be interested in the following: I've rated the article as B-class, not because I don't think it is worthy of GA-class but because I believe it has to be formally nominated at WP:GA first. I will also leave a couple of comments back on its talk page. Hadrian89 (talk) 16:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam Bishop, About William of Tyre in Roger of Wendover : He is indeed mentioned there , which entitles me to include the text - if you disagree - you might mention that some scholars think Roger of Wendover meant this and that - to undo it is tangeling with sourcematerial of our chronicles !!!!!!!!!!understandable science (talk) 05:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC) . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Understandable science (talk • contribs) 05:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gladiator refs problem

Hi Adam, and thanks for that. Do you think it acceptable to simply use Geuiwogbil's link to the Latin Text of the Codex? oops! Forgot to sign. Haploidavey (talk) 16:29, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the fast response. That ref has been like the Old Man of the Sea on my aged back. Haploidavey (talk) 16:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ayyubids suggestions

Hi Adam! I've been working on the Ayyubid dynasty article lately and there's a whole lot more that needs to be done. Right now I'm editing the history of the family and its loosely-held, quite often chaotic, empire. I'm looking towards a future GA and so was wondering what else would be needed besides history. I've gathered quite a few sources detailing their accomplishments in Aden, Cairo, Fustat, Damascus, Jerusalem and Aleppo—mostly infrastructure and architecture-related—and will put this info into a new section under a fit title. If you have any suggestions on how to move along with the article, please tell. I haven't forgotten about Saladin either, but I need to improve articles on the subjects related to him before I could continue working there. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply... I took your advice and have added Government, Economy, Education, Science and medicine, and Architecture sections. I've added what I could find on Ayyubid Arabia (Hejaz and Yemen) and about to finish up the History section with the downfall of the dynasty in Syria and Mesopotamia at the hands of the Mongols and the remnants that continued to exist in the area after the take over by the Mamluks. Do you see anything else that needs to be done, for broadness that is? --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:42, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a picture

Hi Adam, I am surprised to see you very busily working, although it's about five years ago that you mentioned that you were suffering from a lack of time. At least I read so, when I found your picture

on commons. Do you remember when you've taken this fotograf? And where? Thanks for the picture and - hopefully - thanks for your answer. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 09:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alexiad

Hello Adam! No, unfortunately I do not know. For personal use, I have a Greek edition, and for English, I usually use the 1928 edition by Dawes, which is indeed quite close to the original. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. Thanks for the comments, I intend to radically overhaul the Byzantine aristocracy page at some point, dividing it per period (late Roman, i.e. until late 6th century - Middle Byzantine, 7th century to ca. 1080 - Komnenian, 1080 to 1204 - Nicaean and Palaiologan, 1204-1453). Best regards, Constantine ✍ 13:46, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IIIRC, it does, but it is currently ca. 400 km away, on loan to my mother, who is teaching Byzantine history at school :) I could check other examples however come Monday. What exactly are you looking for? Constantine ✍ 19:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

bot on la.wikipedia

Hello Adam, could you please grant the bot flag to la:Usor:MauritsBot (see la:Vicipaedia:Taberna#MauritsBot)? Thank you in advance! --UV (talk) 23:58, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arthurmeighen.jpeg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Arthurmeighen.jpeg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers. If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Richardbennett.jpeg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Richardbennett.jpeg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers. If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:51, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:KingdomofJerusalem.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:KingdomofJerusalem.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers. If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:KingdomofJerusalem.png

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:KingdomofJerusalem.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hashshashin

Adan, I am satisfied with your most recent edit. No one will ever convince me that a video game, any video game, is less trivial than a book, even one by Dan Brown. But, it's not of great importance. I do believe that the information about references in books can be expanded. I doubt the same can be said for the video game. But, to be completely honest, I do not think any of it truly adds to a further understanding of the topic. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 02:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"new castle"

Hi, I wondered if you could help me? I recently expanded Mi'ilya a little, and wikilinked Chastel Neuf there (as it was also called that). But apparently there is another "Chastel Neuf" in Margaliot? I am not sure I have done the right thing here. Do you know about these castles? Regards, Huldra (talk)

Ok, thanks a lot; I´ll change the redir to Margaliot then. I got all my information from the Pringle -source on the Mi'ilya page, which isn´t *that* much. There is a user over at commons, User:Bukvoed, who uploads pictures of lots and lots of interesting old buildings/ruins; & I just try to fill in some of the history ;-) Thanks again, Huldra (talk) 08:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saladin trivia

Actually, I think that entire paragraph adds nothing to the article, but I didn't want to cause some sort of storm by summarily removing it. I thought I'd remove the one that seemed least relevant and see what the reaction was. Now I know, and I'll leave the trivia section unmolested. Thanks, Kafka Liz (talk) 14:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I understand your point about the apparent arbitrariness, and also about why it was easier to revert the way you did. Would you object if I removed the entire section? It's hardly something I'm willing to edit-war over - if folks want it back in, then I'll back off - but I really don't think it adds to our understanding of Saladin. Let me know what you think, Kafka Liz (talk) 23:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's what I figured. I'll leave it be. Thanks for getting back to me, Kafka Liz (talk) 01:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Foundation of the Hellenic World

Dear Adam I would like you to consider your proposal for deletion of the article about Foundation of the Hellenic World. Yesterday I was adding some external links to various articles about Greek history. For that reason you have proposed that the article about the Foundation be deleted because of Spam. The study of Hellenic culture and history is one of the main fields of activity of the Foundation. We use the Internet for informative and educational reasons. All of our sites are offered for free. At the web address http://www.e-history.gr/ one can visit all the Foundation's programmes that have to do with Hellenic history and culture. These include both the body of Hellenic history and isolated presentations of special issues. Some of them are the diachronic presentation of Hellenic history from Prehistory to modern times, specialized historical presentations, as well as two important portals, the Encyclopedia of the Hellenic World and the Cultural Portal of the Aegean Archipelago. Especially the presentation of the Hellenic History (http://www.hellenic-history.gr/) is approved by the Pedagogic Institute of the GREEK MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS as appropriate for scientific and pedagogic purposes (Act 12/2001).

Thank you in advance

Nicos Varsos

nvarsos@fhw.gr

Head of Internet & Multimedia Department

Foundation of the Hellenic World Fhw (talk) 08:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Despotate of Epirus

Hi! About the language of the despotate, I see that the specific source [[11]] mentions a number of languages spoken there, notably the despotate had Italian, Serbian rulers and nobles. There is also a number of Aromanians, Bulgarians as a result of migration, not to mention turkish mercenaries. I believe, in order to mention the Albanian language all this languages have to be mentioned too. What do u believe? to mention a common language or all of them or just some of them?Alexikoua (talk) 15:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Big pimpin'"?

Sorry Adam, but I still have no idea what this means:

Yes, it is. I mean, look at that top hat! He's big pimpin'! Adam Bishop (talk) 01:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Is this some sort of "newspeak' I have not yet encountered anywhere but on WP? You say it is a compliment, which I will have to accept. (If "phat" has beome a compliment then I suppose anything can be.) But what about being a "pimp" in these terms is complimentary, and what, exactly does the word now mean? I did google the word, but am currently none the wiser. Thanks for your help. // BL \\ (talk) 16:02, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Despotate of Epirus

I see you are interested in this historical period. It would be interesting to hear a 'third party' opinion. I was looking also this book [[12]] which has similar content.Alexikoua (talk) 16:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The user Alexikua added Albanian as a language of limited use, but it wasnt since Albanians were one the main groups living in the Despotate of Epirus. I have no problem of adding the other languages, but Albanian was not of limited use. --Sarandioti (talk) 17:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Despotate of Epirus languages

Could you please join Talk:Despotate of Epiros, and help us resolve an issue regarding main languages. The user Alexikua claims that Albanian migrations were limited and he moves Albanian language from main languages of the area to limited use languages. I have provided the necessary sources that clarify totally the issue of Albanian being a main language, but he just keeps reverting them. Could you take part in the clarification of the issue(I have added passages from the source in the talk page)?Best Regards. --Sarandioti (talk) 10:51, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry for interrupting, it seems there was a comfusion about the language of the Despotate of Epirus, Saradioti cumfused the Despotate of Epirus with the Despotate of Arta (althought that's explained on the article's first line) which was Albanian speaking indeed.

The migration argument concerns the geographic region of Epirus not the political identity of the Despotate of Epirus. Moreover the books he provide claiming that there was a continuous struggle between the Despotate of Epirus and Albanian clans (however he claims the opposite that it was Albanian itself). Alexikoua (talk) 11:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

		The Guidance Barnstar
		Thanks for answering my reference desk question. I have been looking for the name of the movie for sometime now, but never had any luck; now that I know what its called, I can look for the actual film and watch the whole thing rather than the last twenty or so minutes. Keep up your good work! TomStar81 (Talk) 07:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pimp ...

Hi, Adam. You'd better see this. Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Richardbennett.jpeg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Richardbennett.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Papa November (talk) 23:01, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Islam Etymology

Thanks for your very valuable input at the language desk. Can you kindly look at the articles Islam and Islam_(term), I believe your contributions to it would be highly valued. NëŧΜǒńğer^{Peace Talks} 11:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

		The Reference Desk Barnstar
		Thanks for answering my pro/epilogue question on the Language Reference Desk!--Ye Olde Luke (talk) 22:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bible translations in the Middle Ages

On June 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bible translations in the Middle Ages, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 14:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Richard W. Southern vs. R.W.

Greetings, Adam! Glad you chimed in; I've come to particularly appreciate your input on this turf. We see there isn't quite a consensus; do you support moving the present page to Richard W. Southern rather than to R.W. Southern as a previous editor suggested? I also plan to note our discussion and conclusion to the Talk pages of the existing articles in interwiki. Cheers! -- Deborahjay (talk) 06:38, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: socionics

As someone who works in the obscure, I am certain that you can provide valuable insight.

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Socionics Tcaudilllg (talk) 19:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Athena

Sorry about the rollback, I only meant to remove the category mother goddess and nothing else. I didn't check for the most recent versions of the page before restoring the previous version. It was my mistake, sorry about that. I'm still going to remove the category mother goddess because Athena is associated with virginity not motherhood. The category isn't appropriate. Again sorry, Sifaka ^talk 04:17, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Krak2.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Krak2.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 02:13, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First Crusade

Hello, I'm glad to help! I was actually reviewing the article for GA (which it wasn't when I started), and I got hopelessly engrossed in it. I think it's now not very far off GA (just a few missing citations really). I will continue to help where I can.

Best, MinisterForBadTimes (talk) 15:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

William the Carpenter

Adam, It is not I that put the recent comments on William the Carpenter. While we may disagree here and there, I put my comments and concerns on the discussion page. I have an idea who it might be based on the IP address, but I can not confirm it. John R. Carpenter Jrcrin001 (talk) 21:38, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]