User talk:Angusmclellan/Archive 20

This is an archive of former discussions. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the active talk page.

August & September 2008

Boleslaw I's intervention in the Kievan succession crisis, 1018

Hey Angus; would you have time to help me merge to versions of this GA/A-class article? See its talk for ongoing discussion.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:35, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

There's not a huge amount to merge, is there? Some of the material - the supposed order of sons and the suggestion that primogeniture mattered - would have to be qualified and seem to be peripheral to this subject. But yes, I'll have a look and it would certainly be sensible to get rid of the Brockhaus stuff altogether if possible. Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Right on all accounts. I was never happy with Brockhaus, although I am not certain whether it was outdated or whether the newer research simply did not look at the same accounts. I like the style Deacon used at the very end of the article (older sources state... but newer sources state...). I wish he would've used it elsewhere, instead of just removing referenced parts of the article and declaring them "nonsense" on the talkpage. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:11, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I've taken a stab at merging both versions (see here). If you could take a look at the merged version (which is likely to be the target of more rv warring, unfortunately), and see if it is up to our standards (I believe it's better than Deacon's version), it would be appreciated.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Angus, thanks for your effort in correcting this article and sorry for the delay in answering your questions. I posted some responses here. Due to the RL issues unrelated to WP my wiki-time is very limited these days. But I plan to follow this article's developments as I did from its inception. Regards, --Irpen 15:12, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I've only had a quick read over your comments, but they seem to be very helpful. I'll reply over there. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

oops

hi Angus, sorry I just edited your Archive 13 by mistake! Peter Hunter Blair query. I was navigating, came to it without thinking and etc. Hope you're well & best wishes from Dr S.P. alias Eebahgum (talk) 16:59, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Blanking Beta's js file

Hi Angus :) Regarding your blanking of Beta's js file, if you can't read java, perhaps it's not best for you to deal with removing his java tools. Particularly considering this is being discussed and no consensus has been reached. If, as I think it will probably go, it is decided that it is best to remove his access to these tools, then someone knowledgeable in java can remove the scripts while leaving his other additions in place. Jennavecia ^(Talk) 22:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

What can I say? How about "I'm lazy and given to hyperbole"? I'm sure that the someone-knowledgeable will be able to put the innocuous stuff back just as easily as doing things the other way round. More importantly, I have also removed Betacommand from the list of AWB users. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you please explain the justification behind taking this action in the middle of a community discussion on the matter? Jennavecia ^(Talk) 03:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I have to say that I didn't, and don't, see any "middle of a community discussion" aspect here. The ANI discussion at had already been archived and collapsed. The idea of blanking and protecting the file had already been raised in there. It struck me as reasonable to do so, so I did it. Not only did it seem like a good idea at the time, it seems like a good idea now. It might have persuaded Betacommand to change his behaviour since he obviously felt strongly about it. It would reduce the chances of an encore because Betacommand's use of automated and semi-automated tools are at the root of the matter. No whizzo tools, no fuckups; no fuckups, no dramas; no dramas, everyone's happy. The various blocks have not been a huge success if the intention was to reduce drama. And now we'll never know if this would have worked any better. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for interrupting, but Java is not the same as JavaScript (JS). In fact, they're very different from each other.--Birdsusing nnn (talk) 07:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, Birdsusing nnn. Angus, you were told after your first post to Beta's talk page that there was ongoing discussion on the matter. You then removed his AWB access and posted again to his talk page, after the message to you, continuing to ignore the on-going discussion. So that doesn't really fly as an excuse. I'm not sure which discussion was collapsed, but there was ongoing discussion, which is still in place, now followed by the proposal from the panel you were alerted of in the aforementioned message. You've been reverted, so it's mostly a moot point now, but while your opinion is valued, it would better serve everyone for you to express it in ongoing discussion as opposed to making premature admin actions because it strikes you as reasonable. Jennavecia ^(Talk) 15:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I read Pascal's comment on Betacommand's talk page while reading yours here just now, and that only because you thought I ought to have seen it last night. Having read it carefully, and the comments on your talk page too, I cannot see how it could have made me do things differently. I'd already zapped Betacommand from the list of AWB users, and he's not been restored to it as I write. These are simple and obvious preventative measures. Are they perfect? No, Betacommand can cobble up something semi-automated himself easily enough, and that is a large part of the problem.

I am sure your efforts are necessary because there needs to be an end to these problems before things get beyond repair. But that doesn't mean everything else has to stop while you decide on a broader solution. And I do not agree that my action was premature. It was long overdue. It should have been done several cycles back since it was simple and obvious. And reasonable too. And in line with policy and principles and practice. But those are part of seeming reasonable to me. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

You blanked his js file (which has been noted to you didn't contain any scripts that he has abused), then posted to his talk page. Following your post about his js file, you were informed of on-going discussion. You then removed his AWB access, returned to his talk page and posted a message following the one to you. Perhaps you didn't read it, I don't know. But the proposal up for community approval now grants him the right to use semi-automated tools, including AWB, but at restricted limits and such. If the community approves of this, his AWB access will then be restored. The fact that you've not been reverted at this point does not mean it wasn't a premature action. And while you may be right that it is a step that should have been taken long ago, it is not something that consensus has dictated. Jennavecia ^(Talk) 16:55, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Where, may I ask, is "the proposal up for community approval" which "now grants him the right to use semi-automated tools"? I think I may have a comment or two to add. My first thought when I read that was that someone came up with the idea in order to get Betacommand into more bother. After all, when did "restricted limits" work in the past when it was bot stuff? Never, as I recall. As for the rest, I disagreed earlier and I disagree now. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Found it. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Ragnvald and Olaf

I think that Ragnvald should be moved to how he is referred to in the Russian sources (the only sources that mention him)- I think Ragvolod or something like that. I'll check Byock next week and see what he says. Thanks for the tip! Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 01:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Category vandalism

Hello Angus. Little problem with User:Gene Poole again. This time he is systematically vandalising a set of newly created categories. He has been warned that he should take this to WP:CFD, but seems committed to continuing in his WP:OWN ways. Advice please. --Mais oui! (talk) 11:17, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

A???frith

Did you mean "Ahlfrith"? Surely it should be "Alhfrith"? Mike Christie (talk) 21:07, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH. Yes, it should. Silly me. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Surely you mean "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHRG". Mike Christie (talk) 21:19, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

France-Burma relations

Hi Angus. As a courtesy note: I am planning to put up for DYK the new article France-Burma relations. The hook would be something like "Did you know that France-Burma relations started as soon as the 18th century"? Would you have some time to look over it? Cheers PHG (talk) 07:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I would like to know whether you read Harvey's History of Modern Burma, Koenig's The Burmese Polity, and the other books linked to Google books snippets, or whether you just read the snippets on Google books. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:55, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Angus. I do have a nice personal library, but unfortunetely not that rich! I used to avoid Google Books (have you seen all the books I have on the Indo-Greeks and the Crusades, listed on my User page?), but I have discovered it to be convenient and to allow any user to immediately check sources if they wish, which, for me, is a relief. Of course, I try to use full page previews as much as possible. Harvey's History of Modern Burma, Keat Gin Ooi's Southeast Asia: A Historical Encyclopedia, Findlay, Ronald and O'Rourke, Kevin H. (2007) Power and Plenty, David P. Chandler's In Search of Southeast Asia in particular give full page views on a given subject, and this is on them that most of my sourcing relies. Cheers PHG (talk) 17:24, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I think you should go ahead with the DYK. No doubt I'll make a few tweaks to the article when I've finished reading Hall's stuff and whatever else I can get - I may have some material on my shelves somewhere. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Cheers PHG (talk) 20:18, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Cui bono

Thanks for your message; yes you are correct. I hadn't thought of that; I was taught that in a published bibliography if the same author is cited to use the Latin abbreviation; I guess I also thought that since some of the articles I was editing dealt with Roman topics it would be okay. I will refrain from doing it in the future; thanks again. FeanorStar7 (talk) 12:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Protection

Hi Angus - let me just finish looking at the edits being made, and I'll unprotect it. Black Kite 17:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

• Unprotected - see the talkpage. Black Kite 18:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Shame

I know it's a shame over at UDR but I slipped up and made a third revert. I had no option then but to call for intervention. I can see what's going on, as I'm sure you can too. I'm thinking it's time to bring it to a head and I've made my feelings clear. I hope you understand I'm not asserting any ownership of the article but like you I'm no fool and I'm aware of the "nibbling plan" which some groups of people have - go back into the article after the dust has died down, change one thing one day then another thing another day, break it down over a period of time so that it has a particular slant. I don't want to see that happen here and I'd rather see the page protected as see a lot of good work by several people destroyed over POV. The Thunderer (talk) 18:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

3 reverts is not - usually - a problem. 4 is! I know what you mean about the nibbling, and I will be keeping an eye on it. The idea of the sanctions is to stop people doing things like that so that people who want to work constructively can. I saw your comment about Dunc's book buying - a strange way to do things! I'll have a word and see if I can't persuade him to be a bit more positive. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Infobox again

Is it possible to make redirects Infobox Scottish Royalty → Infobox British Royalty and Infobox Englsih Royalty → Infobox British Royalty? That way we could use Infobox Scottish Royalty without having to create a whole new template. Surtsicna (talk) 07:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Alaeddin Keykubad

Hi Angus! Do you think it would be a good idea to open a new proposal for the articles on the three Seljuk sultans named Alaeddin Keykubad to be titled under their correct form? You had brought in your interventions in a macro-cosmical manner during the last two caucuses, which is why I am seeking your opinion before else. If you check Alanya article on wikipedia main page on 6 September, you will see that the name is rendered as Alaeddin Keykubad for the first and foremost one. To add an opinionated note, I am expecting little initiative from my fellow Turks on putting the name of an old sultan in correct form, ruminating cattle as many are. All at the same time as holding rather heterodox stances, it had fallen on me to defend the article on the mosque too. Anyway, I can getarrested for writing stuff like this, bozkır cengâverlerinin pimpirikli torunları I should have said if you understood Turkish, it can not be translated. :)

SO, in the future, I'd rather refrain from triggering dynamics that are alien to me and whose consequences remain largely unknown. I am distancing myself from my subject. I intend to put forth a new request for re-naming in a short while. Regards. Cretanforever (talk) 15:11, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, it's been a bad week. That's a good article on Alanya, very interesting stuff. For me it's perfectly ok to refer to Kayqubad in one place and Keykubad in another, but I'm still inclined to thing that Persian-style names are more appropriate for this period. I don't think you'll be in any legal troubles so long as you use the Turkish name in Turkish language writings. Two of the three predate Karamanoğlu Mehmet Bey anyway.

If you think opinions have changed, please do go ahead and nominate it for a move. So long as they get to featured status and one of them appears on the front page soon, I don't mind so much what they're called. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:33, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Aye! Aye! They will certainly be worth developping to featured status under the right names. I will nominate for a move in due time. Regards. Cretanforever (talk) 15:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Pigneau de Behaine

Hi Angus. In relation to my work on Pigneau de Behaine and France-Vietnam relations I would like to use the following book of mine: Monseigneur Pigneau de Béhaine by Frédéric Mantienne 1999, Editions Eglises d'Asie, 128 Rue du Bac, Paris, ISSN 12756865 ISBN 2914402201 ISBN 2914402287. Could you kindly confirm if this is acceptable as a source? Thank you PHG (talk) 19:54, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I would think it would be fine. It's very much in Mantienne's field of expertise and is published by a serious publisher. The article doesn't mention the Musée Monseigneur Pigneau de Behaine at the moment. It's a pity that it doesn't have a website. Best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! PHG (talk) 20:25, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Missions Etrangères de Paris

Hi Angus. To reference and document my work on the Paris Foreign Missions Society (I also did a bit of photographic work there...), I would like to use the following document in French: Missions étrangères de Paris. 350 ans au service du Christ 2008 Editeurs Malesherbes Publications, Paris ISBN 9782916828107. Could you kindly confirm if this is acceptable as a source? Thank you PHG (talk) 20:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't find anything about that. Is it related to the 350th anniversary exposition? If you have a link, that would be helpful! Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:05, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

It is a 15 pages brochure that is provided on the spot by the Paris Foreign Missions Society in relation to the 350th anniversary exposition. I don't think I have a link to this exact brochure, but to other books about the event: [1]. Cheers PHG (talk) 05:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, I saw the exhibition page and I wondered if it was that. There seems no reason not use an exhibition catalogue/brochure, although probably best not to rely on it for anything too controversial unless it's published under the name[s] of the curator[s] of the exhibition. Does that make sense? Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! The information in the brochure essentially consists in factual information about the history of the Missions. Cheers. PHG (talk) 18:33, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 03:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Missions Etrangeres de Paris

Hi Angus! For my work on the Paris Foreign Missions Society, I am planning to use a great book of mine: "Les Missions Etrangères" 2008, Editions Perrin, ISBN 9782262025717. Could you confirm that this is OK? Thank you PHG (talk) 17:23, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

This seems like an excellent choice. Perrin are an undoubtedly reputable publisher. I nearly bought Coup d'Etat à l'Elysée earlier in the week. It looks interesting, so perhaps another day. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! PHG (talk) 17:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Delete this please

Since you are actively deleting stuff at the moment could you try deleting Talk:Mbeki, deletion is not working for me at the moment. I made a post about it at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Can.27t_delete_pages.--Commander Keane (talk) 08:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Weird, didn't work. I can delete other stuff, but not that. Blanking didn't help. Weirder still. Angus McLellan (Talk) 08:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Explain please

Could you explain what you are talking about here BigDunc^Talk 16:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Are you going to explain??? BigDunc^Talk 11:36, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I did: try Ali's talk page. There's not much to explain yet. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:38, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

That is far from an explanation you are making accusations without backing them up. BigDunc^Talk 11:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I will be outlining my case at WP:AE shortly, and I aim to back it up with evidence, but I haven't done so yet. While you're waiting, assume that I'm going to say much the same as Alison said over the weekend, only more so. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:57, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Alison said nothing she showed a link to the history of the article no more, I have not broke any policy. BigDunc^Talk 11:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletions

Forgive me, my tiredness may be getting the better of me, but I don't think I tagged Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/alex fairhurst for speedy deletion. I tagged the project page as an inappropriate creation, but the talk page is the normal place to submit AFC requests nowadays (so anons can use it). We normally leave the talk page up so the submitter can see why it was declined and doesn't submit again and again. Or maybe I did tag it and then I guess you can ignore me. Thank you. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I believe the technical term is Ooops. Yes, I shouldn't have deleted that! Thanks for letting me know. Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:AIB.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:AIB.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Jean-Baptiste Chaigneau

Hi Angus! For my work on Jean-Baptiste Chaigneau, I am planning to use as a complement one of my books: Un Mandarin breton au service du roi de Cochinchine, by André Salles, Editions Les Portes du Large 2006 ISBN 291461201X. Although a re-edition of research made in the 1920s, the book has a lot of interesting details on Chaigneau. Could you give me your comments? Cheers PHG (talk) 20:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

It seems like a reasonable source. As you said, it's not "state of the art", but for a biography that doesn't matter so much. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! PHG (talk) 19:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

CFDW listing format

Hi, I'm sending this message to regular users of WP:CFDW. Now that I've rewritten Cydebot in Python, the door is open to make all sorts of changes to the listing format. Join the discussion here. I'd love to hear some comments from the most frequent users of CFDW on how best to improve it for humans. --Cyde Weys 03:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)