Loading AI tools
Your usual professional job. Surprising that Wikipedia still had no article on the subject.--Wetman (talk) 08:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
On August 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Parias, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
EncycloPetey (talk) 02:23, 17 August 2009 (UTC) 04:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Srnec - Thought I'd let you know, in case you haven't seen it, that Sarah777 removed this comment by you as a supposed personal attack on you. When I restored it, she removed it again, and accused me of making a personal attack. I then applied to Masem, who has so far ignored my request that he make a determination. As such, I readded the comment again, and Tfz removed it because Sarah called it a personal attack. I'm not going to readd it again, but I thought you'd like to know. john k (talk) 14:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Below, for reference, are the original comment and the two subsequent messages left on Sarah777's talk page, which she removed. Srnec (talk) 22:34, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
This response demonstrates clearly that Sarah has no desire to reason with anybody. She has her conclusions—don't let the facts get in the way. The fact is that when we take into account second, third, fourth, etc. preferences, which is what STV is for, we still find that F wins. This is because there is no consensus that F is the worst option. Many would prefer it to some of the other options presented. Which demonstrates clearly that a good many voters, probably most, do not regard this as a an "F v not-F" debate. If that were the essence of the debate, as Sarah alleges, it would come across in the preferences. It does not. But instead of analysis, argumentation, or insight, we get the distraction of "insulting v non-insulting" with the transparent attempt to bait one of her opponents into a response in kind. Srnec (talk) 00:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
== My personal attacks ==
I accused you of having no desire to reason with anybody, of distracting people from serious questions, and attempting to bait your opponents into responses in kind. Then I see this. I stand by my comments. Your childish word play ("oxymoron") is designed solely to arouse anger and distract people from substantive issues. The word play, I should say, is obvious because there is absolutely nothing oxymoronic in the position of favouring a change from the status quo yet accepting the results of the poll no matter what they be. This is a further demonstration that you have no desire to reason at all. In sum, the WP:NPA page tells me to normally comment on content not contributors. But in this case, the contributor is the issue, not the content. So, even if my statement was a personal attack, I stand by it and believe it was entirely justified and acceptable at Wikipedia. Can you follow that reasoning? Perhaps then you will apologise (not to me), and I will have reason to retract my comments. Srnec (talk) 22:03, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
== Another stone comment at your glass house talk page ==
On User:John Kenney's talk page you wrote "MackNamee, please don't write 'f***' on Wiki, especially on John's page. He is most likely a refined person. A concept foreign to you I wager." Does telling MickMacNee that the concept of refinement is foreign to him constitute a personal attack? I seem to recall something about a pot and a kettle. . . —Srnec (talk) 04:22, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Just read your comment. Can you sort this out and add whatever you think necessry to the Gothic architecture page?
Amandajm (talk) 10:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Srnec, I´ve seen your changes on Erwig, and really I think we should to share opinions, I agree as you that Hispania was the most importante province for Visigoths, however for example Septimania was governed by Visigoths and it wasn´t in the Iberian Peninsula, and secondly, Galicia or Gallaecia was another part for Visigoths, maybe it may be considered geographically as "Hispania" but not politically. You can see it in the Visigothic documents:
Hispaniae, Galliae et Gallaetiae[1], fines Spania, Gallie, Gallecie[2] or Spaniae et Galliae vel Gallitiae[3], in provinciam Galliae vel Gallicie atque in omnes provincias Hispaniae
Please, study my proposal and I am sure we can arrange something for the article. Thanks, and best regards.--Nuninho Martins (talk) 10:16, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
,
. . . needs another line - Justa Fernandez was daughter of Fernando Vermudez and sister of queen Jimena, making the last connection a generation closer. Agricolae (talk) 16:18, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Taking out the infobox was may be necessary but it made clear one thing. Turibius was bishop of Astorga, lived and died in Astorga in the 5th Century and his remains where transfered to Liebana. Most of references assimilate him to Turibius "the monk", founder of the Monastery of Santo Toribio de Liebana and, eventually, bishop of Placencia. Both Saints of the Roman Catholic church.
There is, chronologically, Turibius the bishop and then Turibius the monk. 100 years separates them. The interwikis to the Spanish and Galician wikis are de facto misleading but their content is ok (only the name of the article is problematic). I can't find a good bibliographic reference to back this up but the last time I visit the monastery there were two of them buried in the monastery. The only reference I found come from the summary of a conference by Father Loring .
“ | El hecho de que en este Monasterio estén enterrados los restos de los dos Toribios se presta a confusiones. Sin embargo, entre los dos hay cien años de diferencia. Pero tienen algunos puntos de coincidencia: los dos predicaron contra la herejía de Prisciliano, y los dos eran oriundos de Liébana.
Santo Toribio «el monje» nació a fines del siglo V, probablemente en Turieno, pueblo situado en las inmediaciones del Monasterio. Floreció por los años 530, como consta por una carta laudatoria que le envió Montano, Arzobispo de Toledo, fechada el año 527. A mediados del siglo VI juntó cinco compañeros y tomaron el hábito y Regla de San Benito, que en aquel tiempo comenzaba a florecer. Con ellos fundó el convento de San Martín de Liébana, que fue, en antigüedad, el segundo o tercer monasterio benedictino de España, ya en tiempos de San Benito. Santo Toribio «el monje» fue nombrado Obispo de Palencia, según el grabado de Juan Petrosqui. Santo Toribio, Obispo de Astorga, nació en esta ciudad por el año 400. Fue nombrado Obispo de Astorga por el Papa San León Magno el año 448. Murió en Astorga el 16 de Abril del 460. En el interior de la iglesia de Santo Toribio, y en ábside del evangelio, se conserva una estatua yacente policromada de Santo Toribio, realizada en madera de olmo de Burgos, a principios de siglo XIV. |
” |
F. Loring cites the book of Pedro Álvarez (1995), "El Monasterio de Santo Toribio de Liébana y el Lignum Crucis", ISBN: 84-605-2539-2. The wikipedia page on Turibius the monk is still to be created. Do you know any other reference for backing this up?
Thanks Alberto Fernandez Fernandez (talk) 08:31, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Hola Srnec, te escribo en castellano ya que de ingles entiendo poco. Estoy siguiendo tus artículos de la Edad Media española y la verdad es que estas haciendo un trabajo acojonante, es una pena que no edites en wikipedia en castellano, por que la verdad la wiki en español se pierde mucho sin tus contribuciones. Te escribo todo esto dando por hecho por las referencias que citas en tus artículoos que entiendes a la perfección el castellano. Saludos y lo dicho, una pena que no estes en la wikipedia en español. --Truor (talk) 20:08, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
File:Adelchis, son of Desiderius.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Adelchis, son of Desiderius.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Adelchis, son of Desiderius.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:14, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
On September 2, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fernando Núñez de Lara, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
On September 6, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fruela Díaz, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
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 12 September!
Many thanks, Roger Davies talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
The August 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) 21:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Ciao! I am back... hope you are well! I wanted to ask your review help for the numerous articles I am expanding (translating from Spanish!! This is new for me) about medieval taifas. I've noticed Spanish articles here are mostly very poor in quality, detail, style etc. I wonder why. You can find the list of my recent additions in my contrib page... Ciao and thanks from --'''Attilios''' (talk) 09:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators, Roger Davies talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
An article on such an important topic is not best left to one editor. Of Aquinas we learn that "he began his argument of women and their involvement in the creation story by quoting Aristotle's misogynist view of a woman as being 'a misbegotten man'." Of course, Aquinas "began his argument" by describing the view he was to oppose. Aquinas agrees with Aristotle to a point, but his conclusion as against The Philosopher is this: "On the other hand, as regards human nature in general, woman is not misbegotten, but is included in nature's intention as directed to the work of generation. Now the general intention of nature depends on God, Who is the universal Author of nature. Therefore, in producing nature, God formed not only the male but also the female." I'm not sure that somebody who can't properly read Aquinas should be editing articles on church history at all. Srnec (talk) 05:23, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Divorce, adultery, infanticide, and prostitution are hardly "female demands". Srnec (talk) 01:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
The September 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) 02:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
We might have to keep an eye on Emadam. --Kansas Bear (talk) 07:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
On October 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Muño Peláez, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Jake Wartenberg 09:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
I have recently been advised by Spshu "Either take part in the discussion or stop reverting the infoboxes." And, which expresses the heart of the problem: Lotharingia is the same as Lorraine" Even before I posted at Talk:Lotharingia, I was aware that anyone who can assert to me "Lotharingia is the same as Lorraine" is unlikely to listen to anyone or read anything. Another one of pretty much the same genre at that talkpage is asserting that infoboxes are the "default position" at Wikipedia. I'm thinking, as you have contributed competent information at Lotharingia and generally seem the Soul of Sense, you might look in.... --Wetman (talk) 17:45, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Ciao! Ive just finished expanding abd ar-Rahman III to a decent status. As usual, it'd need some cleanup as my English is not that good. Can you help? Thanks much in advance and have fun.... --'''Attilios''' (talk) 10:07, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Your vetting of my effort would be most welcome.--Wetman (talk) 20:14, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
On October 25, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pedro Fróilaz de Traba, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Jake Wartenberg 13:07, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Srnec, thanks for your help and corrections. I write you because I saw you change the place names "Xuvia" to "Jubia" and "Caaveiro" to "Caabeiro", really I don´t understand why you are changing it, I saw they are the oficial names. What´s your reason to change it?. Thanks and best regards.--Nuninho Martins (talk) 01:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Saint Gonzalo at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Materialscientist (talk) 09:08, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
On November 7, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pedro Alfonso, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist (talk) 23:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.
If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
The October 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) 20:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
On November 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Saint Gonzalo, which you recently nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Jake Wartenberg 05:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Pierre de Molins at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Geraldk (talk) 00:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Do not blank the Infobox:Royalty template from the articles of Kings. What are you playing at? - Yorkshirian (talk) 05:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I see you're at it again. Until you successfully get a consensus to (A) have the infoboxes removed from peer-reviewed FAs (B) list the infobox for deletion and successful have it deleted, then you are against the standard for monarchs on Wikipedia. This is somewhat similar to your campaign on the Charlemagne article, where one of the most famous monarchs in history didn't have an infobox because you personally thought "infoboxes are hideous" and similar non-rationale. All I can suggest is you either get over the quirk or simply list the infobox for deletion and have it settled definitively once and for all. - Yorkshirian (talk) 07:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Principality of Salerno: why would be problematic an infobox?--Robyvecchio (talk) 13:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
On what basis is he 'de Carrion'? I don't see it used by either Reilly or Barton, and I am concerned it begs the association with the family of Pedro Ansurez. If you included it just for disambiguation purposes, deriving it from his place of burial, then I would suggest we instead follow his tombstone and at least one charter (perhaps forged but reflecting usage none the less) in calling him "Fernando Fernández of Malgrado". Thoughts? Agricolae (talk) 04:49, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
There was a merger proposal in which you participated and the result was "no consensus". Why did you subsequently effect the merger despite that and with no further discussion? More to the point, why do you think (as has been demonstrated by that merger attempt and at least two previous ones) that only your opinion on the topic is important? -Rrius (talk) 04:06, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Pedro Manrique's seal, obverse.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 01:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
The November 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) 19:51, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
On December 24, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pedro Manrique de Lara, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Wikiproject: Did you know? 11:42, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
The December 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) 04:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
My link may be too scattershot. Wikipedia has no article Mesnée, which should redirect or link to Retinue, if that were a better article...--Wetman (talk) 06:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC).
On January 9, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Suero Vermúdez, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
On January 12, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rodrigo Pérez de Traba, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Wizardman Operation Big Bear 18:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
You have added three battles fought in Palestine to Wikipedia:WikiProject Turkey/New article announcements list. Can you please see my note in the discussion page. Have a good day. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 11:59, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
A few months back, at Talk:Costumbrismo, you asked for a translation of es:Costumbrismo literario. I looked at it; it didn't seem particularly scholarly or particularly well-cited, so I decided to work from scratch and find solid sources. I've written my stuff at Costumbrismo: I think it makes more sense to keep literary and visual costumbrismo in a single article, though I wouldn't scream if someone wants to split it up. Anyway, have a look, let me know if there is something you think belongs there that I may have overlooked. I imagine there could be more overview; as I'm sure you know, overview is hard to cite for, and folks here have gotten pretty hard-assed lately about citability. - Jmabel | Talk 06:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Hey Srnec, here's a translation:
"Since our father divided the kingdom between us, both you and I are held to share the land and its produce with our magnates, with whose help our forefathers possessed the lost land and repulsed the Arabs. Therefore, as the other magnates, whom you deprived, have returned their fiefs to count Ponce de Minerva, and you would not believe the rumours against them, I return to the continent."
The "vos vestris" and "ego meis" bit literally means "with your magnates and with my magnates" - it would have been much simpler to say "nostris magnatibus" but it is really clarifying "you share with yours and I share with mine", rather than all of them sharing together. I'm not sure about the susurronibus, the subjunctive credere seems out of place, but I guess that's what it says.
For the image, how about this one?
Also, I was going to ask you something - do you know anything about the Frankish expedition to Spain in 1086-7? Aside from Bernard Reilly's book about Alfonso VI of Castile, and some random French chronicles, I haven't been able to find much info about it. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello Srnec :-) I've noted previously that on wikipedia you have been the editor who has shone most interest for Lombard-related topics, and thus I thought you may have been interested to know I've subjected the article Alboin to a radical overhaul as part of a plan to better the quality of the Italian upper middle Ages-related articles, taking advantage from the full availablity online of the Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani. If you have some time left to spare from the other articles you are working on, maybe you could find of some interest giving a look at the article and offering any criticisms, hints, suggestions that may come to your mind. And don't be afraid of being harsh! Ciao, Aldux (talk) 21:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello Srnec,
I'm the one who reverted Pippin to Pepin. It happened during the recovery of vandalism where Charlemagne was said to be still alive in December 2009.
At the moment of the recovery, I did not found any discussion about the use of a name or the other. What I did found is an article with the main name Pepin and an alternate name Pippin redirecting to it. I decided that the main name would not only be adequate, but better.
Can you please tell me why you reverted it to Pippin ?
Thanks,
Heracles31 (talk) 15:03, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
The January 2010 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) 04:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Ponce de Minerva at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Materialscientist (talk) 05:11, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
On February 13, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ponce de Minerva, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 06:01, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
On February 13, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article alférez, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
What does it look like on your browser with two right aligned images at the top?
I put two up there because plants do far more damage than animals do, but the animals get more attention, so I my thoughts were to represent plants and satiate the readers who came to find out about animals. I still think this is what should be done, but I can only see what it looks like on my browser, which is fine. --Moni3 (talk) 12:58, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
hello Srnec!
I see that you have started some work on the Emperor of Spain article. Great! But you had removed significant in text notes and citations which concerns me. Was this a mistake to remove the intext citations when getting ready for your edit?
Wanting to be informed! ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 16:47, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
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 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:25, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
The February 2010 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) 23:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:21, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Arnaut Daniel, in his most recent critical edition, calls the woman Ena ("Pus Raimons e Truc Malecx/Chapten n'Enan e sos decx"); since he is generally considered a more reliable source than two troubadours whose very existence is contested, I have used that spelling in the Raimon de Durfort article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Complainer (talk • contribs) 13:03, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
I just came across these pages, and note that the numbering you have used differs from what I am used to seeing, that make Humphrey of the Beard Humphrey de Bohun I, the Humphrey who married Maud de Salisbury Humphrey II, and so on down the line to Humphrey VIII who married Elizabeth of England, and his grandson Humphrey X, the last. This is offset one generation from the scheme you have followed. Were you following a source that had these numbers? If I do a Google Books search for "de Bohun VIII" the first two pages all match the numbering I am used to seeing (for whatever that's worth). Agricolae (talk) 03:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
The March 2010 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) 22:39, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering why these articles have non-standard titles, and it was suggested that you have some reasons for this. Please could you take a look at foot of the thread on WT:NCROY#Artificial titles??--Kotniski (talk) 14:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
The April 2010 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) 20:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
You have reversed an edit of mine on Bernard Ezi IV. I am not sure why you should do this because the first link goes to a redirect page and the second link takes you to a general list of the Earls of Kent. It seemed to me that merging the links to Edmund of Woodstock, 1st Earl of Kent was correct in the context of the article. I hope you can concur and reverse your own edit. Bill Oversixty (talk) 09:09, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
On May 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rotrou III of Perche, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Bradjamesbrown (talk) 06:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Srnec, as a courtesy, you are mentionned in Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Franco-Mongol alliance. Best regards Per Honor et Gloria ✍ 07:35, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
The May 2010 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) 21:42, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.